FUNDAMENTAL MORAL THEOLOGY ALPHA INSTITUTE OF THEOLOGY AND SCIENCE Thalassery, Kerala, India - 670 101 Ph: 0490 2344727, 2343707 Web: www.alphathalassery.org, Email: [email protected] Contents FUNDAMENTAL MORAL THEOLOGY 1. Basics of Moral Theology .................................................... 5 Title: Fundamental Moral Theology 2. Moral Laws ........................................................................ 24 Published by: The Director, Alpha Institute, Archdiocese of Tellicherry Sandesa Bhavan, Tellicherry, 670101, Kannur, Kerala 3. Human Acts ........................................................................ 42 Ph: 0490 - 2344727, 2343707 Published on: 27th March 2016 (Easter) 4. Conscience ......................................................................... 50 Editorial Board: Rev. Dr. Joseph Pamplany 5. Moral Principle of Totality and Integrity ............................. 68 Rev. Dr. Thomas Kochukarottu Rev. Fr. Joseph Kakkaramattathil 6. Principle of Double Effect .................................................. 88 Office Assistance: Bro. Shanet Chiranackal 7. Principle of Material Co-operation ..................................... 99 Mr. Renjith KC Mrs. Anitha Vijayan 8. Moral Analysis of Sin.........................................................108 Mrs. Jeshitha Vijesh Design & Layout: Mr. Midhun Thomas 9. Various Approaches in Moral Theology ............................128 Printing: Vimala Offset Press, Thalassery Copy Right: © All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored 10. Ethical Approaches in Hinduism and Islam ......................144 in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher Foundamental Moral Theology Foundamental Moral Theology Chapter 1 Basics of Moral Theology Moral theology, also called Christian ethics, Christian theological discipline concerned with identifying and elucidating the principles that determine the quality of human behaviour in the light of Christian revelation. It is distinguished from the philosophical discipline of ethics, which relies upon the authority of reason and which can only call upon rational sanctions for moral failure. Moral theology appeals to the authority of revelation, specifically as found in the preaching and activity of Jesus Christ. The moral teaching in Christian communities has varied in the different eras, regions, and confessional traditions in which Christianity has been professed. The Roman Catholic tradition has been inclined to emphasize the mediating role of ecclesiastical institutions in its approach to the moral authority of revelation. Protestant churches have often put great emphasis on the direct, or immediate, moral responsibility of the individual before Published for the use of the students of Alpha Institute of Theology and Science God. The influence of the spiritual director for the moral 4 5 Foundamental Moral Theology Foundamental Moral Theology welfare of the individual Christian has been a significant aspect of Moral object Eastern Christianity. Morality concerns acts (also called ‘human acts), which are the Moral theology has at times seemed to have been restricted in its knowing choices of a human person. In moral theology, an act is an scope to a consideration of those thoughts, works, and actions that exercise of intellect and free will. The mind understands, and the will are viewed as offensive to God and spiritually harmful to human beings- freely chooses. All such knowing choices are subject to the eternal that is, an enumeration of sins. It was thus seen as a negative moral law of God. Each and every knowingly chosen act is either complement of ascetical and mystical theology, which both pre- moral (permissible, not sinful) or immoral (not permissible, sinful). supposes a more positive orientation of the individual toward God. What makes an act moral or immoral? The three fonts (or sources) Many moral theologians, however, have believed that it is more faithful of morality: to the spirit of the New Testament and of early theology not to separate 1. Intention moral teaching from the religious anthropology that is implicit in the 2. Moral object message of the Gospels. This approach has been reflected in the traditional Eastern Christian emphasis on the divinization of man through 3. Circumstances his association with Jesus Christ and in the Protestant concern with Every knowingly chosen act, without any exception, has three fonts the moral power of justification. Medieval and post-Reformation of morality. When all three fonts are good, the act is moral; it is at Roman Catholic moral theology tended to separate moral teaching least morally permissible. When any one or more fonts are bad, the from dogmatic theology. act is immoral; it is a sin to knowingly choose such an act. The significance of the relation of moral teaching to divine revelation All three fonts spring from the human will, and all three fonts are lies in the problem of determining the nature of the particular “highest directed toward some type of end. But we should keep in mind that a good” that characterizes any ethical system. Without such a good end does not justify an evil means, so both the end and the determination of the nature of this good, one could easily have the means must be morally good. impression that morality is simply obedience to a set of rules or laws 1. The intention is the intended end of the human person. The the observance of which has been labeled, more or less arbitrarily, intention is in the subject, the person who acts. The intention is the good. In the light of revelation, sin is seen as a deterioration of the purpose for which the act is chosen by the person; it is the motivation fundamental disposition of a person toward God, rather than as a for choosing the act. If the intended end (or the intended means) is breaking of rules or laws. Virtue is viewed as the habitual capacity of contrary to the love of God, or the love of neighbor as self, then the a person to respond freely and consciously to situations in a manner first font is bad, and the act is immoral. But if the only thing making that reflects and intensifies his conformity to Jesus Christ. your act immoral is your intention, then change your intention. To act The diverse approaches to moral theology through the centuries with a bad intention is always a sin. The human will is the source of have varied greatly in their recourse to logical reasoning and in the this font. degree of their acceptance of general moral principles that are 2. The moral object is the most difficult font of morality to considered universally applicable. Contemporary moral theology must understand; it is the font most often misrepresented or misused in confront a variety of problems, including the scope of individual moral evaluations. And it is the font most often attacked by those responsibility in large corporate institutions, the effects of human who wish to undermine the teaching of the Church on morality activities on the natural environment, the demands of social justice, 3. The font called circumstances is good, if the reasonably the developments in genetics and other biological sciences, and the anticipated bad consequences do not outweigh the reasonably use of sophisticated technology in warfare. anticipated good consequences, for all persons affected by the act. 6 7 Foundamental Moral Theology Foundamental Moral Theology These consequences must be evaluated according to their moral of an innocent human being, even if the attempt fails and no innocent weight, that is, according to an ordered love of God, neighbor, self. person dies. At the time the act is chosen, the person choosing this The consequences of our knowingly chosen acts are the end result of type of act (murder) does not know if he will succeed or fail. The the act; they are a type of end. The choice of an act that is reasonably ultimate success or failure of the attempt to kill the innocent is not anticipated, at the time that the act is chosen, to have bad consequences what makes the act inherently wrong. Rather, it is the inherently that morally outweigh the good consequences, is always a sin. The ordering of the act toward that moral evil which makes the act human will is the source of this font, in so far as the good and bad intrinsically evil. consequences were reasonably anticipated by the intellect at the time Every knowing choice of an intrinsically evil act is a sin. Intrinsically the act was chose, and the will, in the light of that knowledge, chose evil acts are immoral because of the objective moral nature of the the act. act, which is determined by its ordering toward a good or evil object. The Church has always taught, in Tradition, Scripture, the The moral object is ‘in the act’ in the sense that the act is inherently Magisterium, that certain types of acts are immoral, regardless of directed toward that end, regardless of whether or not the end is intention or circumstances. What makes these acts immoral is their attained. Intrinsically evil acts are objectively immoral, regardless of moral species, that is, the type of act in terms of morality. These acts the subjective reason for choosing the act. are immoral by the very nature of the act, in and of itself, regardless The intention for which the act is chosen is not the moral object. of the intention or purpose for which the act was chosen, and These are two different types of end. The intention or purpose of the regardless of circumstances or consequences. These acts are called act is the end intended by the subject, the person who acts. The moral intrinsically evil; they are inherently immoral, and therefore always object of the act is the end toward which the knowingly chosen act objectively sinful. The knowing choice of an intrinsically evil act by itself is ordered. It is as if the act has its own ‘intention’ (figuratively the human will is always a sin. speaking) because the act tends toward, is inherently directed toward, is intrinsically ordered toward a particular type of end (in terms of Intrinsic Evil and Moral Object morality).