A Lie Never Justifiable Part 11

It were useless to follow farther the ever-varying changes of the never-varying reasonings for the justification of the unjustifiable "lie of necessity" in the course of the pa.s.sing centuries. It is evident that the specious arguments put forth by young Chrysostom, in defense of his inexcusable lie of love fifteen centuries ago, have neither been added to nor improved on by any subsequent apologist of lying and deception. The action of Chrysostom is declared by his biographers to be "utterly at variance with the principles of truth and honor," one which "every sound Christian conscience must condemn;"

yet those modern ethical writers who find force and reasonableness in his now venerable though often-refuted fallacies, are sure that the moral sense of the race is with Chrysostom.

Every man who recognizes the binding force of intuitions of a primal law of truthfulness, and who gives weight to _a priori_ arguments for the unchanging opposition of truth and falsehood, either admits, in his discussion of this question, that a lie is never justifiable, or he is obviously illogical and inconsistent in his processes of reasoning, and in his conclusions. Even those who deny any _a priori_ argument for the superiority of truthfulness over falsehood, and whose philosophy rests on the experimental evidence of the good or evil of a given course, are generally inclined to condemn any departure from strict truthfulness as in its tendencies detrimental to the interests of society, aside from any question of its sinfulness. The only men who are thoroughly consistent in their arguments in favor of occasional lying, are those who start with the false premise that there is no higher law of ethics than that of such a love for one's neighbor as will make one ready to do whatever seems likely to advantage him in the present life.

Centuries of discussion have only brought out with added clearness the essential fact that a lie is eternally opposed to the truth; and that he who would be a worthy child of the Father of truth must refuse to employ, under any circ.u.mstances, modes of speech and action which belong exclusively to the "father of lies."

VII.

THE GIST OF THE MATTER.

It would seem that the one all-dividing line in the universe, which never changes or varies, is the line between the true and the false, between the truth and a lie. All other lines of distinction, such even as those which separate good from evil, light from darkness, purity from impurity, love from hate, are in a sense relative and variable lines, taking their decisive measure from this one primal and eternal dividing line.

This is the one line which goes back of our very conception of a personal G.o.d, or which is inherent in that conception. We cannot conceive of G.o.d as G.o.d, unless we conceive of him as the true G.o.d, and the G.o.d of truth. If there be any falsity in him, he is not the true G.o.d. Truth is of G.o.d's very nature. To admit in our thought that a lie is of G.o.d, is to admit that falsity is in him, or, in other words, that he is a false G.o.d.

A lie is the opposite of truth, and a being who will lie stands opposed to G.o.d, who by his very nature cannot lie. Hence he who lies takes a stand, by that very act, in opposition to G.o.d. Therefore if it be necessary at any time to lie, it is necessary to desert G.o.d and be in hostility to him so long as the necessity for lying continues.

If there be such a thing as a sin _per se_, a lie is that thing; as a lie is, in its very nature, in hostility to the being of G.o.d.

Whatever, therefore, be the temptation to lie, it is a temptation to sin by lying. Whatever be the seeming gain to result from a lie, it is the seeming gain from a sin. Whatever be the apparent cost or loss from refusing to lie, it is the apparent cost or loss from refusing to sin.

Man, formed in the moral image of G.o.d, is so far a representative of G.o.d. If a man lies, he misrepresents and dishonors G.o.d, and must incur G.o.d's disapproval because of his course. This fact is recognized in the universal habit of appealing to G.o.d in witness of the truthfulness of a statement, when there is room for doubt as to its correctness.

The feeling is general that a man who believes in G.o.d will not lie unto G.o.d under the solemnity of an oath. If, however, it were possible for G.o.d to approve a lie on the part of one of his children, then that child of G.o.d might confidently make solemn oath to the truth of his lie, appealing to G.o.d to bear witness to the lie--which in G.o.d's mind is, in this case, better than the truth. In G.o.d's sight an oath is no more sacred than a yea, yea; and every child of G.o.d speaks always as in the sight of G.o.d. Perjury is no more of an immorality than ordinary lying; nor is ordinary lying any less a sin than formal perjury.

The sin of lying consists primarily and chiefly in its inconsistency with the nature of G.o.d and with the nature of G.o.d's image in man. It is not mainly as a sin against one's neighbor, but it is as a sin against G.o.d and one's self, that a lie is ever and always a sin. If it were possible to lie without harming or offending one's neighbor, or even if it were possible to benefit one's fellow-man by a lie, no man could ever tell a lie, under any circ.u.mstances or for any purpose whatsoever, without doing harm to his own nature, and offending against G.o.d's very being. If a lie comes out of a man on any inducement or provocation, or for any purpose of good, that man is the worse for it. The lie is evil, and its coming out of the man is harmful to him. "The things which proceed out of the man are those that defile the man,"[1] said our Lord; and the experience of mankind bears witness to the correctness of this a.s.severation.

[Footnote 1: Mark 7:15.]

Yet, although the main sin and guilt and curse of a lie are ever on him who utters that lie, whatever be his motive in so doing, the evil consequences of lying are immeasurable in the community as a community; and whoever is guilty of a new lie adds to the burden of evil that weighs down society, and that tends to its disintegration and ruin. The bond of society is confidence. A lie is inconsistent with confidence; and the knowledge that a lie is, under certain circ.u.mstances, deemed proper by a man, throws doubt on all that that man says or does under any circ.u.mstances. No matter why or where the one opening for an allowable lie be made in the reservoir of public confidence, if it be made at all, the final emptying of that reservoir is merely a question of time.

To-day, as in all the days, the chief need of men, for themselves and for their fellows, is a likeness to G.o.d in the impossibility of lying; and the chief longing of the community is for such confidence of men in one another as will give them a.s.surance that they will not lie one to another. There was never yet a lie uttered which did not bring more of harm than of good; nor will there ever be a harmless lie, while G.o.d is Truth, and Satan is the father of lies.