FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73  
74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   >>   >|  
"And who can bear men casting up to him what a mischief it is to shun a lie that might save life, and to choose truth which might murder a man? I am moved by this objection exceedingly, but it were doubtful whether also wisely." Yet he sees that it were never safe to choose sin as a means to good, in preference to truth and right with all their consequences. [Footnote 1: See Smith and Wace's _Dict. of Chris. Biog_., IV., 478, art. "Priscillianus."] Jerome having, like many others, adopted Origen's explanation of the scene between Peter and Paul at Antioch, Augustine wrote to him in protest against such teaching, with its implied approval of deceit and falsehood.[1] A correspondence on this subject was continued between these two Fathers for years;[2] and finally Jerome was led to adopt Augustine's view of the matter,[3] and also to condemn Origen for his loose views as to the duty of veracity.[4] But however Jerome might vacillate in his theory, as in his practice, concerning the permanent obligations of truthfulness, Augustine stood firm from first to last in the position which is justified by the teachings of the Bible and by the moral sense of the human race as a whole,--that a lie is always a lie and always a sin, and that a lie can never be justified as a means to even the best of ends. [Footnote 1: See _The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers_, first series (Am. ed.), I., Letters XXVIII., XL.] [Footnote 2: _Ibid_., Letters LXVII., LXVIII., LXXII., LXXIII., LXXIV., LXXV.] [Footnote 3: _Ibid_., Letter CLXXX.] [Footnote 4: _The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers_, second series (Am. ed.), III., 460 ff.; _Rufinus' Apology_, Book II.; _Jerome's Apology_, Book I., p. 492.] From the days of Chrysostom and Augustine to the present time, all discussions of this question have been but a repetition of the arguments and objections then brought forward and examined. There can be, in fact, only two positions maintained with any show of logical consistency. Either a lie is in its very nature antagonistic to the being of God, and therefore not to be used or approved by him, whatever immediate advantages might accrue from it, or whatever consequences might pivot on its rejection; or a lie is not in itself a sin, is not essentially at variance with the nature of God, but is good or evil according to the spirit of its use, and the end to be gained by it; and therefore on occasions God could lie, or could approve lying on th
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73  
74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Footnote

 

Augustine

 

Jerome

 
Nicene
 
Fathers
 

consequences

 

choose

 

Origen

 
Apology
 

nature


Letters
 

series

 

justified

 

Rufinus

 

present

 

Chrysostom

 

LXVIII

 

XXVIII

 
LXXIII
 

Letter


examined

 

accrue

 

rejection

 

advantages

 

approved

 

essentially

 

variance

 

occasions

 

approve

 

gained


spirit

 

antagonistic

 
brought
 

forward

 

objections

 

arguments

 

question

 
repetition
 
logical
 

consistency


Either

 
positions
 

maintained

 

discussions

 
Priscillianus
 
adopted
 

explanation

 

protest

 

Antioch

 

mischief