• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dominus Fidelis

ScottBot is Stalking Me!
Sep 10, 2003
9,260
383
51
Florida
✟33,909.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Are some moral questions subject to circumstances?

Stealing is wrong. But if someone is starving and they steal something from a greedy rich person to feed them. Wrong? I doubt it.

Killing is wrong. But if someone is defending the life of another person and they have to kill the aggressor, wrong? I doubt it.

Lying is wrong. But the woman in the Old Testament lied to the authorities about the people she was hiding, and she was clearly justified.

Heck, even abortion is seen as moral if it is done to save the life of the mother in the case of a ecoptic pregnancy, for example.

So are all moral issues subject to circumstance?

I don't think all of them fall into this category because I can think of some messed up things that have no circumstance that make them moral, such as child abuse.

Thoughts?
 

Epiphanygirl

Don't De-Rock Me
Oct 6, 2004
7,016
977
Behind you :)
✟11,873.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I can't argue with anything you've posted, as I agree.
For some things though, there are no "outs" Only God knows our hearts and why people choose to do the things that they do. Good intentions with good outcomes are one thing, but bad intent from the get go, well, ends up with bad outcome.
Intent seems to be the key with this.
 
Upvote 0

nyj

Goodbye, my puppy
Feb 5, 2002
20,976
1,304
USA
Visit site
✟54,248.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
The only thing that changes is the gravity of the offense. If morality is objective, then the moral nature of an act cannot change, because that would make morality subjective. The Catechism speaks many times on the "objective criteria of morality".

So, for example, if one is starving and steals bread, it is still a sin, but the gravity is reduced, and would be venial. However, if you steal food from a poor person, causing them additional suffering, the gravity of the action is increased, and by putting them in harms way (starving them further) you may have committed a mortal sin.

Stealing 10 dollars from Donald Trump probably wouldn't be a mortal sin. Stealing 10 dollars from a homeless person may very well be however.
 
Upvote 0

geocajun

Priest of the holy smackrament
Dec 25, 2002
25,483
1,689
✟35,477.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
DF, to reiterate what nyj already said very well -

CCC-1754 The circumstances, including the consequences, are secondary elements of a moral act. They contribute to increasing or diminishing the moral goodness or evil of human acts (for example, the amount of a theft). They can also diminish or increase the agent's responsibility (such as acting out of a fear of death). Circumstances of themselves cannot change the moral quality of acts themselves; they can make neither good nor right an action that is in itself evil.
 
Upvote 0

Epiphanygirl

Don't De-Rock Me
Oct 6, 2004
7,016
977
Behind you :)
✟11,873.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
nyj said:
The only thing that changes is the gravity of the offense. If morality is objective, then the moral nature of an act cannot change, because that would make morality subjective. The Catechism speaks many times on the "objective criteria of morality".

So, for example, if one is starving and steals bread, it is still a sin, but the gravity is reduced, and would be venial. However, if you steal food from a poor person, causing them additional suffering, the gravity of the action is increased, and by putting them in harms way (starving them further) you may have committed a mortal sin.

Stealing 10 dollars from Donald Trump probably wouldn't be a mortal sin. Stealing 10 dollars from a homeless person may very well be however.
Eloquently stated, Thank you!!!!!
 
Upvote 0

Dream

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2003
5,089
212
✟6,389.00
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Private
C.S. Lewis said it very well. He compared life to a piano. He says that when you play the piano there are no "good" notes and no "bad" notes. It all depends on the other keys that are being played.

This is the same as it is in life. Some keys are already being pressed down, so we must decide what other choices (keys) we should make to best harmonize with what we already have.
 
Upvote 0

Borealis

Catholic Homeschool Dad
Dec 8, 2003
6,906
621
55
Barrie, Ontario
✟10,009.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Defens0rFidei said:
Are some moral questions subject to circumstances?

Stealing is wrong. But if someone is starving and they steal something from a greedy rich person to feed them. Wrong? I doubt it.

Killing is wrong. But if someone is defending the life of another person and they have to kill the aggressor, wrong? I doubt it.

Lying is wrong. But the woman in the Old Testament lied to the authorities about the people she was hiding, and she was clearly justified.

So far you're doing alright. But the next one...

Heck, even abortion is seen as moral if it is done to save the life of the mother in the case of a ecoptic pregnancy, for example.

Abortion is murder. It is ALWAYS wrong. There is no moral justification for abortion, EVER. That's direct from the Church, the Pope, the Magesterium, the Bible, Sacred Tradition...you name it, it doesn't permit abortion, ever.
 
Upvote 0

Dominus Fidelis

ScottBot is Stalking Me!
Sep 10, 2003
9,260
383
51
Florida
✟33,909.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
"Abortion is murder. It is ALWAYS wrong. There is no moral justification for abortion, EVER. That's direct from the Church, the Pope, the Magesterium, the Bible, Sacred Tradition...you name it, it doesn't permit abortion, ever."

Do you know what an ecoptic pregnancy is?
 
Upvote 0

geocajun

Priest of the holy smackrament
Dec 25, 2002
25,483
1,689
✟35,477.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
one must distinguish between direct abortion, and indirect abortion.
Ending an ecoptic pregnancy in which the mother and child have no chance of survival without it will result in an indirect abortion which saves the life of the mother.
All efforts to save the life of the child must be made, however we have no means currently to re-implant the zygote, thus the child dies not because of a direct abortion, but because of our limited ability to save its life.
Someone did point out in an earlier thread, that not all ecoptic pregnancies are fatal as well.
 
Upvote 0

geocajun

Priest of the holy smackrament
Dec 25, 2002
25,483
1,689
✟35,477.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Michelina said:
When discussing Moral Theology, we need to be careful about our terminology and definitions. E.g., killing and murder are not the same. Killing is the taking of life. Murder is the unjust taking of an innocent human life.
Michelina, good point :thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

stray bullet

God Made Me A Skeptic
Nov 16, 2002
14,875
906
✟20,457.00
Marital Status
Private
nyj said:
The only thing that changes is the gravity of the offense. If morality is objective, then the moral nature of an act cannot change, because that would make morality subjective. The Catechism speaks many times on the "objective criteria of morality".

So, for example, if one is starving and steals bread, it is still a sin, but the gravity is reduced, and would be venial. However, if you steal food from a poor person, causing them additional suffering, the gravity of the action is increased, and by putting them in harms way (starving them further) you may have committed a mortal sin.

Stealing 10 dollars from Donald Trump probably wouldn't be a mortal sin. Stealing 10 dollars from a homeless person may very well be however.

What about this then?

Numbers, Chapter 31:

"Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,

"Take full vengeance for the sons of Israel on the Midianites
; afterward you will be gathered to your people."

Moses spoke to the people, saying, "Arm men from among you for the war, that they may go against Midian to execute the LORD'S vengeance on Midian.

"A thousand from each tribe of all the tribes of Israel you shall send to the war."


So there were furnished from the thousands of Israel, a thousand from each tribe, twelve thousand armed for war.

Moses sent them, a thousand from each tribe, to the war, and Phinehas the son of Eleazar the priest, to the war with them, and the holy vessels and the trumpets for the alarm in his hand.

So they made war against Midian, just as the LORD had commanded Moses, and they killed every male.

They killed the kings of Midian along with the {rest of} their slain: Evi and Rekem and Zur and Hur and Reba, the five kings of Midian; they also killed Balaam the son of Beor with the sword.

The sons of Israel captured the women of Midian and their little ones; and all their cattle and all their flocks and all their goods they plundered.

Then they burned all their cities where they lived and all their camps with fire.

They took all the spoil and all the prey, both of man and of beast.


They brought the captives and the prey and the spoil to Moses, and to Eleazar the priest and to the congregation of the sons of Israel, to the camp at the plains of Moab, which are by the Jordan {opposite} Jericho.

Moses and Eleazar the priest and all the leaders of the congregation went out to meet them outside the camp.

Moses was angry with the officers of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, who had come from service in the war.

And Moses said to them, "Have you spared all the women?

"Behold, these caused the sons of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to trespass against the LORD in the matter of Peor, so the plague was among the congregation of the LORD.

"Now therefore, kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who has known man intimately.

"But all the girls who have not known man intimately, spare for yourselves.

"And you, camp outside the camp seven days; whoever has killed any person and whoever has touched any slain, purify yourselves, you and your captives, on the third day and on the seventh day.

"You shall purify for yourselves every garment and every article of leather and all the work of goats' {hair,} and all articles of wood."

Then Eleazar the priest said to the men of war who had gone to battle, "This is the statute of the law which the LORD has commanded Moses:

only the gold and the silver, the bronze, the iron, the tin and the lead,

everything that can stand the fire, you shall pass through the fire, and it shall be clean, but it shall be purified with water for impurity. But whatever cannot stand the fire you shall pass through the water.

"And you shall wash your clothes on the seventh day and be clean, and afterward you may enter the camp."

Then the LORD spoke to Moses, saying,

"You and Eleazar the priest and the heads of the fathers' {households} of the congregation take a count of the booty that was captured, both of man and of animal;

and divide the booty between the warriors who went out to battle and all the congregation.

"Levy a tax for the LORD from the men of war who went out to battle, one in five hundred of the persons and of the cattle and of the donkeys and of the sheep;

take it from their half and give it to Eleazar the priest, as an offering to the LORD.

"From the sons of Israel's half, you shall take one drawn out of every fifty of the persons, of the cattle, of the donkeys and of the sheep, from all the animals, and give them to the Levites who keep charge of the tabernacle of the LORD."

Moses and Eleazar the priest did just as the LORD had commanded Moses.

Now the booty that remained from the spoil which the men of war had plundered was 675,000 sheep,

and 72,000 cattle,

and 61,000 donkeys,

and of human beings, of the women who had not known man intimately, all the persons were 32,000.

Num 31:36**
The half, the portion of those who went out to war, was {as follows:} the number of sheep was 337,500,

and the LORD'S levy of the sheep was 675;

and the cattle were 36,000, from which the LORD'S levy was 72;

and the donkeys were 30,500, from which the LORD'S levy was 61;

and the human beings were 16,000, from whom the LORD'S levy was 32 persons.

Moses gave the levy {which was} the LORD'S offering to Eleazar the priest, just as the LORD had commanded Moses.

As for the sons of Israel's half, which Moses separated from the men who had gone to war--

now the congregation's half was 337,500 sheep,

and 36,000 cattle,

and 30,500 donkeys,

and the human beings were 16,000--

and from the sons of Israel's half, Moses took one drawn out of every fifty, both of man and of animals, and gave them to the Levites, who kept charge of the tabernacle of the LORD, just as the LORD had commanded Moses.

Then the officers who were over the thousands of the army, the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, approached Moses,

and they said to Moses, "Your servants have taken a census of men of war who are in our charge, and no man of us is missing.

"So we have brought as an offering to the LORD what each man found, articles of gold, armlets and bracelets, signet rings, earrings and necklaces, to make atonement for ourselves before the LORD."

Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold from them, all kinds of wrought articles.

All the gold of the offering which they offered up to the LORD, from the captains of thousands and the captains of hundreds, was 16,750 shekels.

The men of war had taken booty, every man for himself.

So Moses and Eleazar the priest took the gold from the captains of thousands and of hundreds, and brought it to the tent of meeting as a memorial for the sons of Israel before the LORD."
 
Upvote 0

stray bullet

God Made Me A Skeptic
Nov 16, 2002
14,875
906
✟20,457.00
Marital Status
Private
Well, I'm trying to understand the Catholic viewpoint on this. Believe me, I am not trying to argue it by any means. However, since the Lord was commanding the killing of people here, is it a sin of a lesser amount, can it be if the Lord orders it?

People were attacked, their cities burned down, their property taken all the males were slaughtered, all the non-virgin women killed, virgins women were taken for the men... was this sinful in Catholicism?

If it is, how can it be, given the killing was ordered by God. If it isn't, then doesn't this mean there is an exception?

After all, Mosaic law is full of crimes punishable by death.

What is the Catholic view on all this?
 
Upvote 0

nyj

Goodbye, my puppy
Feb 5, 2002
20,976
1,304
USA
Visit site
✟54,248.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Private
stray bullet said:
However, since the Lord was commanding the killing of people here, is it a sin of a lesser amount, can it be if the Lord orders it?

But why is the Lord commanding the killing of these people? Did He go one day to the Israeli people and say "Hey, you know... those people tick Me off... wipe them out for Me, would you?" or was there another reason behind it?

Remember, the Catholic Church does understand the idea/principle of "Just Wars", and also self-defense.

stray bullet said:
People were attacked, their cities burned down, their property taken all the males were slaughtered, all the non-virgin women killed, virgins women were taken for the men... was this sinful in Catholicism?

Do you know the age of "virgin women" in such a culture? Small children, which means these survivors were not used as sex slaves, but were instead incorporated into the families of the Israeli warriors. If you look at the number of soldiers, and the number of "prisoners of war" you'll see that each soldier was responsible for between 1 and 2 new mouths to feed. Pretty substantial for a primarily nomadic culture, which would constitute an "Act of Mercy" IMO.

Here is an article by Glenn Miller on the subject: http://www.christian-thinktank.com/midian.html
 
Upvote 0

geocajun

Priest of the holy smackrament
Dec 25, 2002
25,483
1,689
✟35,477.00
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
I am going to enter Chesterton-esque mode here for a minute:
There are many things which can be said about the old testament, however what is most important to say is that the OT is as Saint Paul describes a paidagogos to the truth which was revealed in the new testament.
Meaning that the OT as a whole, was like a slave responsible for teaching its masters children about the greatness of its family, and how to behave itself as a member and respect it prior to the child growing up.
I dont expect this to satisfy you by itself Stray, but keep this in mind when studying the OT in light of the New Covenant.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.