To re-re-re-clarify for the umpteenth time

To re-re-re-clarify for the umpteenth time May 16, 2013

…for those who assume I am a moral idiot who thinks a priest could not use a disguise to hide from those trying to murder him, be aware that I have, many, many many times pointed out that not all deception is lying.  So, for instance, disguises are not lying. Equivocation (“Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up”) is not lying.  Mental reservation (I am neglecting to inform you of what I talked to my confessor about) is not lying.  Evasion (Nazi: Do you know about any subhuman Jews hiding in this neighborhood?  Me:  I don’t know of any subhuman Jews in the neighborhood, but may I say that I admire the way your Fuehrer makes the trains run on time?  And your uniforms are, I must say, very smart looking.  Would you like to come in and search my apartment?  I was just reading this morning in my Bible Paul’s injunction to obey Caesar.  Its in Romans 13.  I think it’s *so* important for Christians to be good citizens, don’t you?”… all while neglecting to mention that secret room in your attic where the Jews are well hidden.)

But lying *is* lying and does not magically become “not lying” merely by the declaration that the person you are lying to “has no right to the truth.”  So when a LA agent says “I want an abortion” that is lying.  Lying is “by its very nature” to be condemned according to Holy Church.  It matters not one  bit that this is not infallble.  It remains authoritative.  And it remains common sense, because if we start going around declaring that a lie is magically not a lie merely because the victim of the lie “has no right to the truth” then we have flung open the door to moral relativism.  It means that 2+2=5 is never a lie just so long as we decree that the person we say this to “has no right to the truth”.  Folly.

Browse Our Archives