 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Talithacumi
Member
| Joined: | Sat Sep 30th, 2006 |
| Location: | Eastern Ohio, USA |
| Posts: | 260 |
| First Name: | Cheri | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic - Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 9th, 2007 03:03 pm |
|
(First of all, not sure if I put this in the right place, so forgive me if I didn't...)
OK, I've always been just a tiny bit confused about this whole idea about how "The end does not justify the means." I mean, I've always professed to believe in Absolute Truth and I've never considered myself an Ethical Relativist (though apparently I sometimes come across that way, according to someone on here   - though when I do it's usually because I seriously have a question or else I'm playing Devil's Advocate - or maybe I'm just very confusing :?)... Anyway, but here's the thing. The Catechism of the Catholic Church claims that the "End does not justify the means (# 1759)." But what about this kind of situation: let's say it's WWII, for instance. The Nazis are heading your way and there are Jews in your house. You know that if the Nazis find them they are going to murder them, so you hide them. So when the Nazis come knocking on your door and ask if you've seen any Jews in the area, do you tell them the truth or do you lie to save their lives? I mean, if the end (saving lives) does not justify the means (lying), well, then innocent people are dying a horrible death all because you were afraid to tell a lie. I know that lying is wrong, but is it not sometimes OK to choose a lesser of two evils?
Would this situation not fall under the same category as "self-defense" if you have to kill someone who's about to blow your head off (or who's about to kill one of your family?) There again, we have the end (saving lives) and the means (killing the would-be murderer).
I truly believe that in either of these cases, there is no real wrong-doing on the part of the person who lies or the person who kills the would-be murderer. But if the Magisterium teaches otherwise... ? What am I to think? I'm sure I'm missing something here... I even took a couple of classes on Morality and Ethics at Franciscan U - I don't remember much; it was a long time ago - but in both classes, the question of self-defense came up and apparently, according to the professors who taught the courses, at least, there's no blame on the part of the person who is "defending" (as long as there's no better way to handle the situation)... but I don't remember there being any real discussion on the whole "Ends / means / justification" issue where this subject is concerned (like I said, it's been awhile... I may have just forgotten).
So what's the real story here? Am I missing something? I would think there should be some leeway on this issue, but I didn't see anything in the Catechism that suggests there is... can somebody help me out on this one? Just not sure what to think...
And here's the thing... OK, I confess I kind of got hooked on the TV show "24". Now, if I, a Catholic Christian who (and I'm not saying this to brag but only because I'm pretty sure it's the truth) probably knows more about my faith than probably 90% of the people in my rather spiritually-non-intellectual small-town parish (again, by saying this I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but only that I'm a wee bit more educated about spiritual matters than most of them, believe it or not, though I'm very ignorant compared to people like Rick and David)... at any rate, if I have a hard time understanding this, then what are people (who haven't had the benefit of a decent moral upbringing or education) thinking who watch this kind of show where the hero even threatens to kill his own - albeit criminal - brother and father to save the country? He cuts off the fingers of terrorists to get them to talk (it's all about trying to foil terrorists, etc.), and so on. What are we to think of such things if the "end does not justify the means"? And there are all kinds of movies out there portraying these kinds of "heroic virtues" among our country's "protectors"... the "Mission Impossible" movies, the "007" movies, and so on. And these movies are so popular! What are we learning? And what are we supposed to think?
JMJ
- Cheri
____________________
“We do not want a Church that will move with the world; we want a Church that will move the world.”
- G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5085 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 9th, 2007 03:36 pm |
|
Talithacumi wrote: So what's the real story here? Am I missing something? I would think there should be some leeway on this issue, but I didn't see anything in the Catechism that suggests there is... can somebody help me out on this one? Just not sure what to think...
Neither of the situations you mention fall under this category because the gravity of the situations are not equal. It is acceptable to tell a "white lie" to spare someone's feelings, for example. ("No, of course that dress doesn't make you look fat! Excuse me while I hang this "Wide Load" sign on your butt...") Of course, sometimes charity demands that we tell the truth in such a situation, but if the person is not looking for an honest opinion but an affirmation ... well, I'm sure you understand. It's a husband thing.
Anyway, the question comes in when we look at an apparent good, but have to commit a gravely evil act to accomplish it.
"Grandma is elderly and she's in pain, and her quality of life is terrible. Let's just help her to go a little quicker."
"That poor baby is going to be born with a birth defect, and will be a real burden on his parents. Maybe they'd be better off if he wasn't born..."
"We know he's the killer even if we can't prove it in court, so let's make sure he can never do it again..."
In each of these cases, other alternatives are available. We can help to ease Grandma's pain and keep her comfortable, read to her and visit her, until God decides it's time for her to die. We can support the parents and provide medical care and tax incentives to assist in raising the handicapped child. We can continue to look for evidence to convict the killer, and maybe even keep him under surveillance to make sure he can't kill again.
Self-defense is a different issue because there is no alternative available. If there is, it isn't self-defense. The use of deadly force is only justified when there is no other apparent alternative. Your situation of lying to the Nazi's is not the same either, because a lie is a very minor evil compared to handing human beings over to be killed. In fact, in exactly this circumstance, the Church lied through its teeth, keeping Jews in churches, convents, monasteries, and even the Vatican to protect them. Is there one of us who would turn our child hiding in a closet over to a murderer to avoid a lie? I certainly hope not.
We do things every day where the end justifies the means. We make our children miss school when they're sick, and take distasteful medicine, and even get shots, to make them better. I can tell you from experience that a prostate exam is evil and a colonoscopy is even worse, yet it certainly brings about a good in that it provides for early detection of cancer. I'm sure mammograms and pap smears fall into the same category.
But the end does not justify the means if the means is a grave evil that exceeds the gravity of the good. "Let's kill half the people in Africa so the rest will have enough food..." It doesn't work that way.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Talithacumi
Member
| Joined: | Sat Sep 30th, 2006 |
| Location: | Eastern Ohio, USA |
| Posts: | 260 |
| First Name: | Cheri | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic - Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 9th, 2007 03:58 pm |
|
cajunrick wrote: Neither of the situations you mention fall under this category because the gravity of the situations are not equal. It is acceptable to tell a "white lie" to spare someone's feelings, for example...
Anyway, the question comes in when we look at an apparent good, but have to commit a gravely evil act to accomplish it.
"Grandma is elderly and she's in pain, and her quality of life is terrible. Let's just help her to go a little quicker."
"That poor baby is going to be born with a birth defect, and will be a real burden on his parents. Maybe they'd be better off if he wasn't born..."
Rick,
Of course. You always know how to give a simple common-sense response to my silly over-analyzing. I need that... Left to myself, I can conjure up all kinds of problems and literally make mountains out of molehills. I guess it’s just that somewhere along the way I’d been led to understand that the teaching of the Church was that “The end never justifies the means,” and that’s where my confusion was… I guess you could say it was more the inference that I’d gotten somewhere other than the actual common-sense teaching that bothered me.
But since I'm on the subject, what are we supposed to think of, say, a CIA agent whose job is to foil a terrorist's plot? Are they absolutely wrong to threaten someone associated with a terrorist plot by cutting off their fingers if nothing short of physical violence to their person will make them give away a military secret that might "save the world," so to speak? I mean, let's just say I'm playing Devil's Advocate again... and... "inquiring minds would like to know." In some cases, I still find it hard to discern where to draw the line... When I see stuff like that in the movies it makes me cringe and I think it's terrible and it must be wrong, but then I'm a woman and I cringe at violence anyway. Men are a little different. They seem to thrive on it almost in some ways... At any rate, I don't know if I'm just being squeamish or...? Sometimes guys will say, "Hey, sometimes that's what it takes, and you have to do things like that." What do you good Catholic men out there say to that? I just would like to know... would that fall under the "self-defense" kind of thing?
JMJ
- Cheri
Last edited on Mon Apr 9th, 2007 04:12 pm by Talithacumi
____________________
“We do not want a Church that will move with the world; we want a Church that will move the world.”
- G.K. Chesterton
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5085 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Online
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 9th, 2007 04:03 pm |
|
Talithacumi wrote: cajunrick wrote: Anyway, the question comes in when we look at an apparent good, but have to commit a gravely evil act to accomplish it. I guess it’s just that somewhere along the way I’d been led to understand that the teaching of the Church was that “The end never justifies the means,” and that’s where my confusion was…
That is the teaching of the Church, but it has to be read with common sense. If the means is gravely evil, no end can justify it. Fighting off an attacker or lying to an illegitimate government is not a grave evil. The end may not justify the means, but sometimes the circumstances do.
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
DrDave
Member
| Joined: | Mon Nov 6th, 2006 |
| Location: | Mildura, Australia |
| Posts: | 217 |
| First Name: | Dave | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Cradle - Lapsed - Renewed Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 9th, 2007 10:34 pm |
|
I would answer this by saying that of course the ends never justify the means. Lying does not go from being a bad thing to being a good thing just because of your intentions, but, as Rick said lying, on the sliding scale of really, really good to terribly, terribly evil is definitely on the good side of handing an innocent person over to be killed. Not right, but definitely better than the alternative, and in some situations there is no "right" alternative so we are force to choose "the lesser of two weevils"
Regards Dave
|
|
|
Current time is 02:57 am | |
|
|
|
|
|
