[verity]

Is there any moral/ethical difference between condoning an action and advocating an action?

[xzins]

I'm sure there are examples that push the limits in the other direction, but my understanding in our public law is that the one who hires a contract killer is more liable than the killer who pulls the trigger....condoning versus advocating.

Supporting versus doing.

[Tantumergo]

"Is there any moral/ethical difference between condoning an action and advocating an action?"

As xzins mentions later, condoning and advocating would fall on a spectrum which amounts to co-operating in the sin of another. They are merely different degrees of co-operation, but both would amount to formal co-operation and hence the person condoning or advocating a sin would share in the guilt of that sin.

There is co-operation in sin which would not necessarily share in the guilt of that sin, however. One such example would be "remote material co-operation."

e.g. if you ran a hardware store and a man came in to buy a hammer and he told you that he was going to kill someone with it, then if you sold it to him you would be guilty of formal co-operation.

If the man came in to buy a hammer and did not express his evil intent, but still used it to kill someone, then this would be remote material co-operation on your part, but you would not share in the guilt of the sin.

We are guilty of formal co-operation in the sins of others by:

- participating directly and voluntarily in them
- by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
- by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
- by protecting evil-doers (cf. CCC 1868)

Catholic bishops who have protected abusers please note!!!

[Salvation]

**Is there any moral/ethical difference between condoning an action and advocating an action?** Yes!

Catechism of the Catholic Church and what it says about those who support abortion