FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251  
252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   >>   >|  
ch by our accusers is especially thrown into our teeth, I shall bring these observations to a close. St. Alfonso Liguori, then, it cannot be denied, lays down that an equivocation, (that is, a play upon words, in which one sense is taken by the speaker, and another sense intended by him for the hearer,) is allowable, if there is a just cause, that is, in an extraordinary case, and may even be confirmed by an oath. I shall give my opinion on this point as plainly as any Protestant can wish; and therefore I avow at once that in this department of morality, much as I admire the high points of the Italian character, I like the English rule of conduct better; but, in saying so, I am not, as will shortly be seen, saying any thing disrespectful to St. Alfonso, who was a lover of truth, and whose intercession I trust I shall not lose, though, on the matter under consideration, I follow other guidance in preference to his. Now I make this remark first:--great English authors, Jeremy Taylor, Milton, Paley, Johnson, men of very different schools of thought, distinctly say, that under certain extraordinary circumstances it is allowable to tell a lie. Taylor says: "To tell a lie for charity, to save a man's life, the life of a friend, of a husband, of a prince, of a useful and a public person, hath not only been done at all times, but commended by great and wise and good men. Who would not save his father's life, at the charge of a harmless lie, from persecutors or tyrants?" Again, Milton says: "What man in his senses would deny, that there are those whom we have the best grounds for considering that we ought to deceive,--as boys, madmen, the sick, the intoxicated, enemies, men in error, thieves? I would ask, by which of the commandments is a lie forbidden? You will say, by the ninth. If then my lie does not injure my neighbour, certainly it is not forbidden by this commandment." Paley says: "There are falsehoods, which are not lies, that is, which are not criminal." Johnson: "The general rule is, that truth should never be violated; there must, however, be some exceptions. If, for instance, a murderer should ask you which way a man is gone." Now, I am not using these instances as an _argumentum ad hominem_; but the purpose to which I put them is this:-- 1. First, I have set down the distinct statements of Taylor, Milton, Paley, and Johnson:--now, would any one give ever so little weight to these statements, in forming a rea
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251  
252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   272   273   274   275   276   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Milton

 

Taylor

 

Johnson

 
forbidden
 
English
 

allowable

 
Alfonso
 

statements

 

extraordinary

 

deceive


grounds
 

charge

 

persecutors

 

harmless

 

father

 
tyrants
 

senses

 

commended

 

neighbour

 
instances

argumentum

 
hominem
 

exceptions

 

instance

 

murderer

 

purpose

 

weight

 
forming
 

distinct

 

commandments


injure

 

thieves

 

madmen

 

intoxicated

 

enemies

 

person

 

general

 

violated

 

criminal

 

commandment


falsehoods

 

remark

 

confirmed

 

opinion

 

hearer

 

plainly

 
department
 

morality

 

Protestant

 

intended