Well I attended RCIA...

[Crazy Liz]

The next example was a woman in Nazi Germany lying to a Nazi Officer who asks if she's hiding Jews. Theres about 10 Jews in her attic. If she tells the truth she and her family and all the Jews in her attic will die. Did she sin by saying "no"? The Priest argued no she did not because the Nazi was not asking "In Justice" therefore the question was not valid.

Now, I what I saw this as was equivication and rationalization of sin. I believe the woman by virtue of not answering a direct question in truth lied and sinned against God.

I would have to agree with the priest. There are times when telling the truth is more of a sin than lying. I think the Nazi example is a good one. Rahab helping the Israelite spies get away is another good one.

This is the way a lot of Christians analyze such moral dilemmas. I tend more to go along with Bonhoeffer and say that the lie is a sin, and betraying innocent people to death by telling the truth is also a sin. Therefore, the Christian must take "responsible action" and trust God to justify the sinner, not the sin.

The practical result, lying to the Nazi, is the same, but Bonheffer doesn't deny that guilt is incurred. In such a case, there is no sin-free course of action available, but the Christian is not paralyzed by the dilemma. The Christian incurs guilt and trusts the mercy of God when necessary.

Perhaps you would feel more comfortable with Bonhoeffer's view, TLE.

 

[seebs]

Check out Exodus 1, where God blesses people for lying.

 

[RED that's ME]

A person will be punished for lying no matter what kind it is.

It like when someone says I got GOOD news and BAD news....

The GOOD NEWS is you're going to be bless for your efforts but the BAD NEWS is you will also be punished for lying. A lying tongue is not only something God hates, it is also something that is an abomination to Him.
Proverbs 6:16-19 "These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren."

Colossians 3:9-10 "Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him."

Matthew 15:18-20a "But those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man. For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies: These are the things which defile a man..."
Numbers 23:19 the Bible says, "God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?"

Revelation 21:7-8 "He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son. But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." Exodus 20:16

 

[aReformedPatriot]

This is the way a lot of Christians analyze such moral dilemmas. I tend more to go along with Bonhoeffer and say that the lie is a sin, and betraying innocent people to death by telling the truth is also a sin. Therefore, the Christian must take "responsible action" and trust God to justify the sinner, not the sin.

The practical result, lying to the Nazi, is the same, but Bonheffer doesn't deny that guilt is incurred. In such a case, there is no sin-free course of action available, but the Christian is not paralyzed by the dilemma. The Christian incurs guilt and trusts the mercy of God when necessary.

Perhaps you would feel more comfortable with Bonhoeffer's view, TLE.

not really, it sounds as if Bonhoeffer is saying that it is ok to delliberatly sin (in this particular case) simply for the fact that God's grace covers it.

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

Blast!! I finally get to a catechism class and its liberal.... lol...

I'd welcome you into my class, but its not exactly in walking distance either. I haven't been accused of being a liberal.

 

[FLMike]

I think there are many of us who are trying to make this a reality but there are some here on the forums who are bitter Baptist and Catholic alike. I have high hopes that we can be peaceable together. While we may disagree there is no reason that we shouldnt treat each other any differently than we would treat Christ. Did not Jesus say 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'

Welcome to B/A.

Thanks for the welcome. Yes, some Catholics behave the same way. I'm watching a thread on another site and cringing at the antics of a couple of Catholics there. Some people just never learn about the honey and the vinegar.

 

[Caedmon]

If I lived in Nazi territory and was hiding a dozen Jews in my attic, you can bet your bippy that I would lie to save their lives.

 

[Stormy]

congratulations

Thank You!

 

[Crazy Liz]

not really, it sounds as if Bonhoeffer is saying that it is ok to delliberatly sin (in this particular case) simply for the fact that God's grace covers it.

That would be a shortcut through Bonhoeffer's reasoning process - a process that specifically disallows any category corresponding to "ok" in such situations. I think Jesus taught specifically that there is not a category of "OK" that makes exceptions to God's revealed commands and intentions.

I think possibly for a catechism class it may be necessary to take some shortcuts since most people will never find themselves in such a position. What they need to do is see that when someone commits a sin for a good purpose, we Christians should not condemn them. As a priest, I can see more difficulty. A Catholic priest hearing the confession of someone who lied to save lives might tell the person they did not sin, so they have nothing to confess. I think it would be better to give absolution without requiring penance.

It takes some pretty careful analysis to get there, and most people take shortcuts in their thinking. It is much easier to say something is not sin, or that it is "ok" than to say that Christian ethics may require sin in some rare cases here it can't be avoided. I trust the analysis of people who have actually faced such situations better than those who analyze them in a vacuum, hypothetically. (Not that I think everyone who has been there did the right thing or learned anything from it, but some have.)

So I disagree with both you and Red. I think the only way to resolve it is to say God justifies the sinner, not the sin. The Hebrew midwives, and Rahab are biblical examples. Both were praised. Neither was punished. They did not decide it was "ok" to lie in those situations. They decided it was necessary to lie to save lives. Bonhoeffer was pastor to the Nazis who were plotting to overthrow Hitler. After all attempts to remove him from office nonviolently had failed, they asked him, "May we kill Hitler?" He told them this was not a legitimate moral/ethical question. (And I agree.) The legitimate question was, "Must we kill Hitler?"

Do you see why "ok" makes me so uncomfortable? "OK" implies an affirmative answer to a "may" question - that something is permissible, but not required. For the Hebrew midwives and for Rahab lying was ethically required. It was not a choice that they could either do or not do with equal ethical implications either way, such as when you ask, "Is it ok to buy an ice cream cone?" Of course it's OK. It's not wrong to buy it, and it's not wrong not to buy it. A theological word for such matters is adiaphora. it is something that really doesn't matter ethically or from God's POV.

Breaking a commandment of God should never be put in a category of adiaphora. This is what the Pharisees had in mind WRT divorce when they questioned Jesus in Matthew 19. Jesus replied emphatically that divorce is never adiaphora. I think lying also is not adiaphora. Christians may disagree on whether lying is adiaphora in trivial matters like a surprise birthday party, but when it comes to life-and-death situations, it most certainly is not.

 

[Stormy]

not really, it sounds as if Bonhoeffer is saying that it is ok to delliberatly sin (in this particular case) simply for the fact that God's grace covers it.

I do not agree with you. Jesus has always taught against hypocrisy. Remember what he said to the Pharisees? Knowing the letter of the law and not the heart of the law is something he spoke against... right? Remember when he broke the Sabbath? And still we all know that Jesus never sinned.

IMO If my telling the absolute truth, resulted in innocent people being tortured and killed... then their blood would be on my hands. This would not be God's will.

 

[Crazy Liz]

Proverbs 6:16-19 "These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren."

This is where the question of the surprise birthday party comes in. "A lying tongue" means a person who lies habitually. It is listed separately from "a false witness that speaketh lies," and I think rightly so. Perjury is not something that happens regularly because very few of us act as witnesses on a regular basis. One of the ten commandments prohibits perjury, not all lies. Now I think it is right to interpret it as indicating, as this Proverb also does, and other scriptures you quoted, that on the positive side, God desires truthfulness and integrity. Therefore, people who lie habitually need to repent and change their ways, and children need to be trained not to lie to develop their character. Even if lying about a surprise birthday party is adiaphora, rationalizing such lies can lead to a habit of untruthfulness, which is something God hates.

 

[Crazy Liz]

I do not agree with you. Jesus has always taught against hypocrisy. Remember what he said to the Pharisees? Knowing the letter of the law and not the heart of the law is something he spoke against... right? Remember when he broke the Sabbath? And still we all know that Jesus never sinned.

This is a good point that argues against Bonhoeffer's analysis that guilt is incurred, but God justifies the sinner, not the sin.

IMO If my telling the absolute truth, resulted in innocent people being tortured and killed... then their blood would be on my hands. This would not be God's will.

This I agree with, and so would Bonhoeffer.

 

[ZiSunka]

Bonhoeffer was pastor to the Nazis who were plotting to overthrow Hitler. After all attempts to remove him from office nonviolently had failed, they asked him, "May we kill Hitler?" He told them this was not a legitimate moral/ethical question. (And I agree.) The legitimate question was, "Must we kill Hitler?"

I don't think he was exactly a pastor to the Nazis. He was a pastor who was safely here in America when the war broke out and could have stayed safely here, but he felt convicted to go back and stand against Hitler and his ideology. He was defiant to the Nazis, not a collaborator with them.

As for the argument that all non-violent ways to remove Hitler failed, the attempt to remove him violently failed, too, and Bonhoeffer and three other members of his immediate family were executed for the attempt.

 

[ZiSunka]

It's really difficult to have a discussion about whether or not it's good to lie to save the life of another. I hope that I never have to make that choice.

 

[ps139]

Blast!! I finally get to a catechism class and its liberal.... lol...

its a shame its the only one within walking distance too...

Hey Mark,
with that whole "God is changing" thing, that is odd...everything the priest said up to that point sounded in line with Rome, except for that...thats the only thing he said which would be considered "liberal" Too bad classes are over, but I'm glad you found it interesting!

 

[Crazy Liz]

I don't think he was exactly a pastor to the Nazis. He was a pastor who was safely here in America when the war broke out and could have stayed safely here, but he felt convicted to go back and stand against Hitler and his ideology. He was defiant to the Nazis, not a collaborator with them.

When he returned, he joined the Abwehr, the Nazi equivalent to the CIA. I did not say he became a collaborator with the Nazis. If I gave that impression, I need to correct it. He joined the Abwehr because the plot against Hitler was already underway, and its leaders were in the Abwehr. Some were his own relatives.

Among this group, he acted as pastor, although this was not his official position. Officially, he was an intelligence agent - a spy, but he was a double agent.

As for the argument that all non-violent ways to remove Hitler failed, the attempt to remove him violently failed, too, and Bonhoeffer and three other members of his immediate family were executed for the attempt.

This is true, but this group could not have foreseen that in advance.

 

[Crazy Liz]

It's really difficult to have a discussion about whether or not it's good to lie to save the life of another. I hope that I never have to make that choice.

However, here we may again talk about Bonhoeffer as an example. He was safe in America, but voluntarily returned to Germany. Don't you think he had to swear an oath of loyalty to Hitler when he joined the Abwehr? And yet his true goal in joining the Abwehr was to see Hitler removed from power. He took a false oath, didn't he?

Do you think it would have been morally better for him to stay in America, where he would not be put in a position of taking a false oath?

 

[Monica02]

Blast!! I finally get to a catechism class and its liberal.... lol...

its a shame its the only one within walking distance too...

Do you have a Catechism of the Catholic Church? If not, try to obtain one. This book will help you determine if what you are being told is true Church teaching. We were handed some borderline heretical book for our RCIA. Fortunately I already had a pretty good handle on Church teaching and could spot the subtle incorrect nonsense in this book. We had excellent lessons as well. I have heard about some really bad RCIA programs.

 

[Cright]

Do you have a Catechism of the Catholic Church? If not, try to obtain one. This book will help you determine if what you are being told is true Church teaching. We were handed some borderline heretical book for our RCIA. Fortunately I already had a pretty good handle on Church teaching and could spot the subtle incorrect nonsense in this book. We had excellent lessons as well. I have heard about some really bad RCIA programs.

The CCC is online at www.vatican.va

Or more directly here: http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm