Lying
#11
(06-26-2011, 10:10 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote:
(06-26-2011, 10:08 PM)Rosarium Wrote:
(06-26-2011, 09:59 PM)GottmitunsAlex Wrote: I suppose my humble definition (and very brief) would be:
Purposely not saying the truth.

Now, my example:

Everything is hectic at my job and I am visibly tired and relieved to be going home. Someone on the next shift asks "How was it?" and I respond "Wonderful". The worker laughs knowing how it can be.

I purposely stated the opposite of what was true.

Did I sin even though I knew my meaning would be understood most likely?

???
I demonstrated a clear lack of physics? What are you talking about?
And I was mistaking you for someone else. Sorry. Ignore that statement. I edited it out. I was shifting threads without a clutch again.

I want citations, names, definitions, Latin, the works.
Reply
#12
Rosarium,

The example you gave is indeed a lie, and is sinful.  It is known as a jocose lie, and since it is an abuse of language and misrepresentation of the truth, it is a lie, and is sinful.  That would be in any moral theology book, pretty much.
Reply
#13
(06-27-2011, 09:51 PM)jordanawef Wrote: Rosarium,

The example you gave is indeed a lie, and is sinful.  It is known as a jocose lie, and since it is an abuse of language and misrepresentation of the truth, it is a lie, and is sinful.  That would be in any moral theology book, pretty much.

The question was for him, not everyone.

I did preliminary research on this matter, unlike the person who was responding. I wanted him to realise what sort of answer I wanted.

So, jocose lies are sinful even if there is an understanding of the true meaning inherent in the communicated message?

Reply
#14
From Catholic Encyclopedia:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09469a.htm

Quote:Following St. Augustine and St. Thomas, Catholic divines and ethical writers commonly make a distinction between (1) injurious, or hurtful, (2) officious, and (3) jocose lies. Jocose lies are told for the purpose of affording amusement. Of course what is said merely and obviously in joke cannot be a lie: in order to have any malice in it, what is said must be naturally capable of deceiving others and must be said with the intention of saying what is false. An officious, or white, lie is such that it does nobody any injury: it is a lie of excuse, or a lie told to benefit somebody. An injurious lie is one which does harm...

The absolute malice of lying is also shown from the evil consequences which it has for society. These are evident enough in lies which injuriously affect the rights and reputations of others. But mutual confidence, intercourse, and friendship, which are of such great importance for society, suffer much even from officious and jocose lying. In this, as in other moral questions, in order to see clearly the moral quality of an action we must consider what the effect would be if the action in question were regarded as perfectly right and were commonly practiced. Applying this test, we can see what mistrust, suspicion, and utter want of confidence in others would be the result of promiscuous lying, even in those cases where positive injury is not inflicted...

Moreover, when a habit of untruthfulness has been contracted, it is practically impossible to restrict its vagaries to matters which are harmless: interest and habit alike inevitably lead to the violation of truth to the detriment of others. And so it would seem that, although injury to others was excluded from officious and jocose lies by definition, yet in the concrete there is no sort of lie which is not injurious to somebody...

According to the common teaching of St. Thomas and other divines, the hurtful lie is a mortal sin, but merely officious and jocose lies are of their own nature venial.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)