musturde Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Is lying a mortal sin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hyperdulia again Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 i'm answering off the top of my head so i might be wrong...it depends on what the lie was about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysologus Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Yes, lying is gravely sinful. However, like with all mortal sins, if you didn't give the lie your full consent of will (you were under duress or psychological or other mitigating circumstances) or you didn't realize that what you were doing was wrong, then it's only venially sinful. Either way, if your conscience is bugging you, go to confession before next Sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 musturde, Check out the Catechism. You want to look to see what requirements are needed for an act to be a mortal sin as well as read the section about bearing false witness to see the gravity of lying. A lot depends upon the nature of the lie. If you lie habitually, you can easily lead yourself into a mortal sin. But in practically, most people's lies are usually venial. Let me know if you want links to the particular passages in the Catechism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironmonk Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Is lying a mortal sin? I would say Yes. If we know the truth, and purposfully lie, it would be a mortal sin. Unless someone's life was at stake... take for instance the priests that hid the jews in WWII... they could morally lie to the nazi's to save the lives of the jews. From the Catechism: http://www.usccb.org/catechism/text/pt3sec...t2chpt2art8.htm 2482 "A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving."281 The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil: "You are of your father the devil, . . . there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies."282 2483 Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. By injuring man's relation to truth and to his neighbor, a lie offends against the fundamental relation of man and of his word to the Lord. 2484 The gravity of a lie is measured against the nature of the truth it deforms, the circumstances, the intentions of the one who lies, and the harm suffered by its victims. To lie is to speak or act against the truth in order to lead someone into error. 2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned. It is a profanation of speech, whereas the purpose of speech is to communicate known truth to others. The deliberate intention of leading a neighbor into error by saying things contrary to the truth constitutes a failure in justice and charity. The culpability is greater when the intention of deceiving entails the risk of deadly consequences for those who are led astray. 2486 Since it violates the virtue of truthfulness, a lie does real violence to another. It affects his ability to know, which is a condition of every judgment and decision. It contains the seed of discord and all consequent evils. Lying is destructive of society; it undermines trust among men and tears apart the fabric of social relationships. 2487 Every offense committed against justice and truth entails the duty of reparation, even if its author has been forgiven. When it is impossible publicly to make reparation for a wrong, it must be made secretly. If someone who has suffered harm cannot be directly compensated, he must be given moral satisfaction in the name of charity. This duty of reparation also concerns offenses against another's reputation. This reparation, moral and sometimes material, must be evaluated in terms of the extent of the damage inflicted. It obliges in conscience. Hope this helps... God Bless, Love in Christ & Mary ironmonk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musturde Posted July 7, 2003 Author Share Posted July 7, 2003 I have an odd feeling of scepticism upon me . My father is paying half of my trip to Lebanon but for some reason I am not excited (seems ungrateful) but my mom told me if asked say yes because she noticed I was acting excited. She told me that I didn't know I was excited which confuses me also. Our neighbor got to a conversation with me and asked if I was excited about going, I answered yes and moved along. This seems to be a work of scepticism and even if I am innocent the devil is still working on causing me great scepticism . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysologus Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Unless someone's life was at stake... take for instance the priests that hid the jews in WWII... they could morally lie to the nazi's to save the lives of the jews. Ironmonk, this exact scenario is something about which I've been wondering. Are you sure that this is right? Do you have any Catholic quotations/sources about it? I'd really like to know. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Ironmonk, this exact scenario is something about which I've been wondering. Are you sure that this is right? Do you have any Catholic quotations/sources about it? I'd really like to know. Thanks. I don't have any exact sources, but in an instance like what da Monk related, those who were doing harm to the Jews didn't have the right to know the information they sought so the priests were less/not culpable for the sin of lying. Also such an instance, I think could fall under the principle of double effect, and so the evil of lying was allowed for the greater good of saving lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dUSt Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Also such an instance, I think could fall under the principle of double effect, and so the evil of lying was allowed for the greater good of saving lives. Oooh, now we're getting heavy. So, in theory, if say, we lie to non-Catholics with the intention of saving their souls (the greater good), whether it is an effective way of conversion or not--is it a sin? And might this be the same mentality a lot of anti-Catholics use when speaking falsities against the Church? They know it's false information, but continue to propogate it to "save us" (the greater good in their minds)? Deep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Oooh, now we're getting heavy. So, in theory, if say, we lie to non-Catholics with the intention of saving their souls (the greater good), whether it is an effective way of conversion or not--is it a sin? And might this be the same mentality a lot of anti-Catholics use when speaking falsities against the Church? They know it's false information, but continue to propogate it to "save us" (the greater good in their minds)? Deep. LOL I guess some could try and use PDE like that, but it would be an abuse of the theory--they'd just be using it left and right to condone their actions. I gotta run, so I can't explain PDE any more than that right now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Read on: 2488 The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. Everyone must conform his life to the Gospel precept of fraternal love. This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it. 2489 Charity and respect for truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet languae. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Excellent post, Anna. Keeping in mind fraternal love would colour how you answer your dad about going to Lebanon. You could say yes you are excited, but you are also a little nervous, or concerned about it too. When talking to the neighbor, are they really asking, or just commenting? If you said no, would they be willing to listen to the explanation, or would they probably misconstrue your misgivings and think you ungrateful or your father uncaring of your feelings? What does the Catechism say about mortal sin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrysologus Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Thanks for the quote, Anna, but that doesn't say that we can lie, only that we can remain silent or answer in a discrete manner. I'm not sure how I would answer Nazis in a discrete manner. Another thing about this that has been bothering me is the military. They lie about things which are secret. A "cover story" is in fact, a lie. Is this okay? I don't know what this "double effect" thing is, but I was taught in RCIA that it's NEVER okay to do something evil in order to produce something good. Two wrongs don't make a right. An example my priest gave was that we can't perform an abortion even if not doing so would kill the mother and possibly the child, but we can emove her uterus to save her life, even if the side effect is that the fetus is lost. It was a matter of primary and secondary causes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 2491 Professional secrets - for example, those of political office holders, soldiers, physicians, and lawyers - or confidential information given under the seal of secrecy must be kept, save in exceptional cases where keeping the secret is bound to cause very grave harm to the one who confided it, to the one who received it or to a third party, and where the very grave harm can be avoided only by divulging the truth. Even if not confided under the seal of secrecy, private information prejudicial to another is not to be divulged without a grave and proportionate reason. You have to balance the lesser of two evils. Easy deception, habitual lying, can lead to unneccessary lying in grave matters. Lying to prevent a greater evil is required in some circumstances. For example, if a person was hiding a Jew in Nazi Germany, are they to reveal them if asked the "right" question? If you refuse to answer, it would be logical you don't want to answer in the affirmative. Let's say your child has a fatal illness. Do you tell the child they are going to die, or do you say they are very sick and the doctor is doing all they can to help them. Is that not deception and a lie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IcePrincessKRS Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 I don't know what this "double effect" thing is, but I was taught in RCIA that it's NEVER okay to do something evil in order to produce something good. Two wrongs don't make a right. An example my priest gave was that we can't perform an abortion even if not doing so would kill the mother and possibly the child, but we can emove her uterus to save her life, even if the side effect is that the fetus is lost. It was a matter of primary and secondary causes. You're right Chrys, we cannot do something evil to produce something good. PDE "allows" the evil to occur for. The way the use of PDE should go is the good happens before or at the same time as the evil. The good cannot be the direct effect of the evil.a GREATER good. The good must be equal to or outweigh the evil that is allowed. In the case Ironmonk stated the priests saying 'Sorry guys, I don't see any Jews around here" outweighs the evil of the Jews being killed, etc. that would have occured had they said 'Here ya go, take these guys off our hands, will ya?" The Jews in hiding, being safe would be the good effect, and if silence or a lie was used (the priests may not have said anything and just let the Germans run through and check out the place--remember the Sound of Music? The nuns never lied, they just didn't say anything) the evil would have occured after or simultaneously. (Maybe I should pull out my readings and notes from Moral Theology and give a couple quotes.... lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now