Are you implying that the more difficult path is always the higher, better, or "morally superior" one?
That is an obvious error. Suffering is not a good in itself. Otherwise:
- I should sabotage my marriage and stable family situation. I'm way too happy and content with a stable wife and family.
- I need to commit more crimes. Living a law-abiding life is way too predictable, stable, and happy. I'm sure I'd suffer more dealing with lowlifes, being in jail, fleeing the authorities, etc.
- Serving God needs to stop as well. A life of sin is WAY more difficult and torturous, if you think about it. A clean conscience brings a lot of real happiness.
I'm sure you see my point by now. Sometimes ease, convenience, and earthly happiness are the HIGHEST POSSIBLE PATH, which would have been chosen by the greatest saint.
With all due respect, returning money that was not intentionally paid to you really isn't the same as your examples here at all... Under normal circuмstances, you are in fact expected to pay back the money, no excuse. He had good excuse here to not pay it back, thus it would more than likely be permissable not to.
By comparison, sabotaging your marriage would never be permissable. You signed up for that before God. Your debt there is to both Him and your family, no?
There has to be a valid reason to do something like this, besides just "to suffer more, because suffering is good". His reason was that he was paying back money unintentionally given to him. Again, this would always be expected under normal circuмstances. He chose the narrower path here IMO. If you look at the rest of his life, it supports that opinion.
"The Communists then enticed Peter with financial rewards if he would meet with them monthly to snitch on other anti-Communist Romanians. Peter refused and from that day on, government officials followed Peter whenever he traveled from place to place."
It is also implied that he refused to deny God and suffered much more than he had to in the camps for this reason. Would it have been better to snitch on the others or deny God to lessen his natural punishment in the camps? Maybe then he could have been stronger for when he got out of prison, and he could have better resisted the commies on the outside.
It was obviously a tough time for them all, but the obituary doesn't give THAT much detail on that portion of his life.
"The Communists overpaid Peter for some of his work at a time when he could
barely afford enough food to feed his family."
The fact that his family didn't starve is proof that he adequately provided for them here. They later followed his lead on the hunger strikes, so it's worth considering the fact that it is likely his family backed him entirely in his decision to repay the money.
I still would have a very hard time making that call myself though...