The M+G+R Foundation

When Does the End Justify the Means


It is our purpose and intent with this document to illustrate that in certain circumstances the end justifies the means as long as the situation is being corrected permanently while the "means" are being applied.

We have chosen a letter sent by one of our regular readers from the US and our response to it to explain what we mean when we say that "in certain circumstances the end justifies the means".


The Letter

One question.........

I have always believed that the end never justifies the means. Yet, you proposed that the exception be made for the people of Africa for the use of condoms to help prevent AIDS... just for a certain length of time!

This confuses me, however, I totally agree with you on this matter as people are killing each other.

They do not have "Eyes to See or Ears to Hear". How can one justify bad behavior by saying someone is sick?

How can we forgive those who accept bad money for a good cause, in love?

How do you explain to a non-Christian that God allows bad things to happen? Accidents, victims of crime?

I know well of free choice but it does not convince a non-believer.

Forgive me for all of the questions, but you are my family and I trust all of you as I know you are doing God's Will and I believe in you.

I wish I had 3 months just to sit and listen to you.

God Bless you for all of your patience, love and understanding..... especially of the weak ones like me.

In His Name and Grace,

Our Response

Thank your for writing and sharing your concerns with us.

We also believe, and have frequently said, that the "End does not justify the means", however, we must evaluate each individual situation with the Light of the Holy Spirit to see how we should get from point "A" (living outside the Law of God) to point "B" (living within the Law of God).

The first step is to determine the "Why" of the point "A" and its consequences - short term and long term.

We shall take first the killing of another human being as a point "A" - this is extremely grave under any circumstances : There is no just war; there is no just killing. Logically, point "B" is the stopping of the killing of human beings.

Say that we have an individual who is prone to kill other humans due to X,Y and Z reasons and does so on a regular basis. Maybe he does not know that "Thou shalt not kill" is a real and absolute Divine Law. Obviously, he needs to be instructed in Divine Law and needs to be assisted in his conversion - however, in the meantime, he cannot be allowed to go around killing people until "the Evangelization" takes a hold of his soul. He must be stopped for the benefit of others and himself.

Now, let us take up birth control as another point "A" situation. What is the root problem of artificial birth control? Sexual interaction without responsibility becomes just another sport - where one may even switch partners just as we may do for a tennis match. The more uneducated the individual is and the less means of entertainment he/she may have, the more he/she will turn to sex and/or drugs as an "entertaining sport". The more bored a rich and well educated individual gets, the more he/she will also turn to sex and/or drugs as an "entertaining sport".

Promiscuous sex and the use of drugs are the two societal maladies which can harm a soul the most. Thus, logically God has allowed AIDS. He is more interested in our soul within the overall Eternal picture, than just the brief time it resides in a body on Earth. If some activity is going to gravely harm the soul - He rather take them Home soon. (1)

In the birth control situation - We could then take two positions: (a) Let them destroy themselves and thus "help God"; or (b) Intervene and help them find the way to God in a more natural way.

If we take position (a), it would logically follow, to the derange mind, that all sick and poor people should be exterminated.... and " doing this we are doing them a favor and serving God along." Believe it or not, that thinking is "on the table" of the Future Masters of the world.

If we take position (b), we assist them in not killing each other, through unprotected sexual intercourse, by providing them with the appropriate protection WHILE simultaneously Evangelizing them so that they will abandon the "Outside the Laws of God" lifestyle, i.e. "Sexual activity is a sport."

In certain countries of Europe they established a "Clean Syringe Program" wherein the drug addicts would turn in their used syringes and get clean ones in order to arrest the spread of AIDS through sharing infected syringes. This was done WITHOUT any Evangelization, therefore, what on the surface looked like a very charitable act was indeed contributing to the further degradation of their souls.

This would be the same if we just pass out condoms and do nothing else.

In conclusion:

(a) Passing out condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS via sexual intercourse - and do nothing else - to save lives cannot be considered as a "means justified by the end" - because we are working against God by helping in the destruction of souls.

(b) Passing out condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS via sexual intercourse - and implement a solid Evangelization program to change the mentality of the individuals through Light and Grace - is a method of "buying time" while the leaven of the kingdom of heaven works its wonders in their souls - thus we are cooperating with God' plan for His children. [The kingdom of heaven is like to leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened. [Matthew 13:33]]

Of course, this thinking could degenerate into a philosophical discussion about the difference or equivalence of murdering/killing with a gun, for example, and killing with an AIDS contaminated sexual liaison. However, we must keep in mind that: Death by gunshot is quick and little can be done to draw the soul to God before separation of soul and body. Death through AIDS is slow and much can be done to draw that soul to God before its separation. Therefore - we cannot compare, nor treat alike, both methods of killing a body.

Regarding your other question: "How do you explain to a non-Christian that God allows bad things to happen? Accidents, victims of crime? " The full answer may be found in footnote (2).

Regarding whatever "...does not convince a non-believer" - that is completely outside the responsibility of the Elect. We are to take a horse to water, drink of it so that the horse sees that it quenches our thirst with no ill effects; then, if the horse still refuses to drink, we must allow the horse to die of thirst or at least go thirsty for a while until it realizes its error. The Elect never were, nor will ever be, part of the Inquisition crowd. Their technique would have been "choking the horse to death" while force feeding him water to "keep him alive".

Yes, that is how ridiculous and pathetic the alleged Evangelization has been in the last ca. 1600 years.... and stay tuned, as we have already explained, it will be tried again. (3)

(1) The near Apocalyptic Climatic and Geological Events Worldwide
(2) Pain is the megaphone...., Divine Mercy in Action - Part I  and Part II
(3) The striking similarity of the French Revolution with the activities "scheduled" for End of These Times


When there is a will, there is a way... and when it is God's Will... get out of the way!

Published on January 14th, 2020

The Seal of St. Michael the Archangel © Copyright 2020 - 2024 by The M+G+R Foundation. All rights reserved. However, you may freely reproduce and distribute this document as long as: (1) Appropriate credit is given as to its source; (2) No changes are made in the text without prior written consent; and (3) No charge is made for it.

The M+G+R Foundation
Online since 1998
Introduction for First Visit Frequently Asked Questions
Home Page English Español Portugues
Search Page Index of Documents
Disclaimer About Us Contact
Back Up Home Page (Mirror Site)