Thank you for your response. Can you anticipate the answer to your points? Will he agree that the third alternative is not always available? Can you anticipate the answer to the point that Rahab was no Samson?
I always fear getting involved in "a striving of words to no profit," so please don't let me waste your time. I did study ethics; I have taught ethics at church, and I would want to share in your interest in the subject if you are so inclined.
Do you know the technical name for your own ethics dilemma position? There are several ways to arrive at the conclusions you have stated here, but most people will shy away from letting their position be categorized. You at this point have concluded the conversation. There is really nothing left for Msgr. Pope to say and you are still left unconvinced. He may not even understand the objections that you raise.
As a working pastor/counselor, the temptation in the work is to oversimplify, especially when working with someone who does not really want to do right. I cannot remember when I might have counseled a real person who really wanted to do what was right and who also really needed my help knowing what that would be. They usually have made up their minds and want me to help get their family to excuse what they are gonna do anyway.
Note that i did not say there was no third alternative, but not viable third alternative (as morally justified). In every trial there is an alternative to obeying God out of faith. Job could have killed himself. But enduring the trial was the only viable moral alternative.
Rahab could have been silent, or attempted to run or fight, or told the truth, but unless she had faith to believe God would blind the eyes of the search party, there was only viable moral alternative let to her in order to save the lives of the men of God, fulfilling the intent of the Law in this context.