Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Moral Theology is a branch of systematic theology that studies the interrelationship of faith and
life. It is to be understood and appreciated in light of Christian discipleship rooted in the Word of God
and in the context of the Church.
OUTLINE
1. Moral Theology
1.1 Definition and Nature
1.2 Two Perspectives
2. Philosophy/ Theology in Morals
2.1 Autonomous Ethics
2.2 Faith Ethics
3. Nature of Good
4. Structure/ Foundations of Moral Theology
4.1 Ethics (What we study)
4.2 Morals (What we live)
5. Division of Moral Theology
5.1 Fundamental Moral Theology
5.2 Special Moral Theology
1. Moral Theology: - The term moral comes from the Latin word mors which means manner, custom, habit
and the term theology comes from two Greek words theos and logos which means God and word
respectively. Thus, moral theology (MT) is “God talk” about manners, customs, and habits. This
etymological meaning is quite accurate but not adequate. In moral theology faith and human dimensions
must be included.
1.1 Definition and Nature: - (Summary of Christian Morality: “TO DO IN LOVE WHAT TRUTH
DEMANDS,” Bernard Haring) MT is just one discipline of Systematic Theology. While Dogmatic
Theology’s focus is God’s Revelation and Christian Ethics’ focus is the Human Person responding to that
revelation. MT’s focus is the response to revelation (i.e., the implications of faith in Jesus Christ for the way
in which we live). MT attempts to find the meaning of the relationship between Christian Faith and moral
action (Life). The norms of MT are not only those given by reason but also by faith which includes the data
from the Tradition and the Magisterium of the Church. MT seeks to give a systematic, organized account of
the requirements of Christian vocation to perfection/holiness (cf. Mt 5:48). MT has existed in continuous
dialogue with the Church and the world which has led it to develop the field of casuistry (to determine what
one’s precise moral obligations are) and to maintain a relationship with Canon Law (which determines the
gravity of actions).
1.2 Two Perspectives: - (Lat. Agere seguitur esse, “Doing follows being” or “To do is to be and to be is to
do.”)
Ethics of Being: character/ disposition of the agent; what sort of (good) person should I become as a
result of my faith in Christ?
Ethics of Doing: To perform right actions; what sort of actions should I perform as a result of my faith
in Christ?
2. Philosophy/Theology in Morals
2.1 Autonomous Ethics: - (Reason) Morality through Reason.
The emphasis is not on God who reveals morality, but on the human person who discovers it.
2.2 Faith Ethics: - (Revelation) Moral reflection is based on Scripture and the Mystery of Faith.
Revelation is the specific contribution in knowing what morality is.
NB: Christian morality is rooted in both approaches. We know Moral truths through Revelation and
Human Nature (“Reason informed by Faith”).
REFERENCES:
Caga, Raul G. Biblical and Fundamental Moral Theology. Class Notes. Tagaytay City: DWST, 2006-07.
Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press,
1989.
. Moral Theology experienced a “paradigm shift” from the Pre Vatican II to Vatican II. A student of
moral theology has major task in order to get in touch with the challenges of the times and in
consonance with the directions of the Church.
Outline
1. Three Shifts after Vatican II
1.1 Shift in Focus
1.2 Shift in World View
1.3 Shift in Method
2. Three Tasks of Moral Theology
2.1 Sensitivity
2.2 Reflection
2.3 Systems
1. Three Shifts after Vatican II: - Gula identifies three important shifts relevant to the renewal of moral
theology. These are the shifts in focus, in worldview, and in method.
1.1 Shift in Focus
From Act-Oriented to Person-Oriented (law values/persons)
Rooted in Scripture (Scripture, the soul of Theology”) and multi-disciplinary (in dialogue). Cf
Optatam Totius, no. 16
Morality is a Vocation (“I do things because I want and understand”).
From “act oriented” to “person oriented.”
Love and Justice as the basic principles of Morality (Cf. Deus caritas est, Benedict XVI)
1.2 Shift in World View
2
From Classist to Modern Historically Consciousness
“To read the signs of the time.” Dynamic and evolutionary concept of reality, continuous reform, on
going dialogue (Lat. Ecclesia simper reformanda)
Historical Consciousness. Human freedom and uniqueness of the historical moral situation. Truth is
in history.
The truth is something we explore and don’t possess in its fullness.
Two consequences: Commitment to the Truth (Cf. Jn 16:13-16) and Commitment to truths which
challenge us to broaden our horizon.
1.3 Shift in Method (A sound approach applies both methods)
From Deductive to Inductive
Classic deductive method. We can grasp the essence of reality, human nature and human good.
Historically conscious method (“historical consciousness”). Empirical and deductive, begins with the
historical particulars, concrete and changing; moral behavioral norms do not spell out everything in
advance.
2. Three Tasks of Moral Theology
2.1 Sensitivity: - To be moral and to be loving imply one another. To experience the sacredness of human
life and the value of the human person;
2.2 Reflection: - It explores and extends into all areas of life the primary affective experience that has
generated an awareness of basic values and a commitment to them. To support, analyze and communicate
what we grasp by heart (“critical realism”).
2.3 Systems/ Methods: - Strategies that help us to choose/love well and in the most of conflicting values:
• Teleology. Human being the builder; what is my goal? (Goal Ethics)
• Deontology. Human being the citizen; what is the law? (Duty or Law Ethics)
• Relational – Responsibility. Human being the answer; what is happening?
REFERENCES:
Caga, Raul G. Biblical and Fundamental Moral Theology. Class Notes. Tagaytay City: DWST, 2006-07.
Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press,
1989.
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Volume 1: General Moral
Theology. Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1996.
3. The human person is God’s greatest gift in all creation. He/she is embodied spirit with the dignity of
being made in God’s image and redeemed by Christ’s blood. He/she is “embodied freedom,” called to
authentic love of self, others and ultimately of God.
Outline
1. Christian Moral Anthropology
1.1 Human Life
1.2 Human Person
1.3 Imago Dei
2. Human Freedom
3. Authentic Responsible Freedom
4. Basic Freedom or Freedom of Self- Determination
5. Freedom of Choice
6. Impediments Freedom/Obstacle of Human Acts
7. Sources of Human Acts
2. Human Freedom: - It is the power/capacity (rooted in reason and will) to act or not to act; to chose good
and to avoid evil; to perform deliberate actions on one’s own responsibility. Freedom is connected to will
and knowledge. The higher is the value a person can choose among several options the greater the person’s
freedom.
Freedom From: Everything that opposes our true self- becoming with others in the
community
Three kinds of obstacles: Biological, Psychological and Social pressure.
Interior obstacles. Ignorance, distorted passions and fears.
Exterior forces: Threats of violence.
But the great obstacle is sin. We need liberation from slavery of sin.
St. PAUL
Freedom For: Growing as integrated persons and children of God sharing in the
life of
Christ, our liberator, through his spirit.
Freedom of Choice: Fundamental Freedom of one’s very – self in the moral act.
As task: Striving to overcome obstacles.
As process: Gradual growth towards authentic freedom.
Freedom of: To be set free from slavery & share in the glorious “Freedom of the Children of God.”
4. Basic Freedom or Freedom of Self – Determination: - Loving relationship with God, the ultimate end
of our life, in the way we relate to all things. It demands personal involvement and rests in understanding
the human person as a complex multi – leveled being (body, soul, spirit).
5. Freedom of Choice: - It is the freedom to choose an identity as person (to become a certain sort of
person). It is to realize our capacity to be ourselves through the particular choices we make. It is to choose
one option among a number of others.
Fundamental option
Self- determination
A. Freedom Fundamental stance
The Moral Freedom of choice
Subject of self (self-awareness)
(or Agent) conceptual knowledge (head)
B. Knowledge of moral values
Evaluative knowledge (heart)
4
Through person involvement and reflection.
2) WILL
A. PASSION
Emotions are part of who/what we are. They are the connection between senses and mind. They are
emotions or movements of the sensitive appetite that incline us to act or not to act in regard to something
felt or imagined to be good or evil passions are neither good nor evil. They are morally qualified to the
extent that they are effectively engage reason and will. Therefore, they are morally good if they contribute to
a good action (virtue); they are morally evil if they contribute to an evil action (vice).
Love: it is an attraction for the good for the good absent or desire. It is to will the good of another.
B. FEAR AND SOCIAL PRESSURES: Shrinking back of the mind on account of an impending evil.
C. VIOLENCE: Compulsive influence brought to bear up on one against his will by some extrinsic agent.
D. DISPOSITIONS AND HABITS: inclinations to act and react that have root in the character and inherited
propensities.
5
intention doesn’t make an evil act good. A bad intention makes an act evil that, in and of itself, can
be good.
c) Circumstances:- It is the total context in which the action takes place. CCC 1754: Circumstances
contribute to increasing or diminishing the moral goodness or evil of human acts. They cannot
change the moral quality of the action.
REFERENCES:
Caga, Rahul G. Biblical and Fundamental Moral Theology. Class Notes. Tagaytay City: DWST, 2006-07.
Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press,
1989.
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Volume 1: General Moral
Theology. Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1996.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1749-70.
4. Conscience is “inner core and sanctuary” of the human being. There he/she is alone with God,
whose voice echoes in his/her depths. The human person is morally obliged to develop a good
conscience, a free, correct, clear and certain conscience. The moral formation of a personal and
moral conscience is a moral imperative for every man and woman of good will.
I. CONTEXT
The thesis statement is all about the description of Conscience.
II. EXPOSITION/CONTENT
1. Definition/description of conscience
• The inner voice summoning us to love the good and avoid evil by applying objective moral
norms to our particular act.
c. Consequent: takes place after the decision- approves, excuses, reprove, and accuse.
a. As a moral faculty: manifests to men their moral obligations and impels them to fulfill
them.
b. As a practical moral judgment: tells man in the concrete situation what their moral
obligations are.
a. Capacity – synderesis
b. Process – Moral Science
c. Judgment – conscience
6
2. QUALITIES OF A GOOD CONSCIENCE
A. Personal Freedom; FREE: it assumes personal decisions with full responsibility unhindered.
C. Moral Attitude; CLEAR: with due regard to values is able to achieve sound moral demands
and make the proper transition.
D. Degree of certitude; CERTAIN: all practical doubt is resolved. It judges without fear and
error.
• Doubtful: uncertain about morality; lacks sufficient confidence to make a secure judgment.
• Perplexed: one cannot make a morally good choice since it seems both equally wrong act or
to refrain from acting.
• Probable: arriving to a point where it finds security in its own formation of a moral attitude
at a habitual level.
7
In conflict situation where harm will result from either two alternatives open to the agent, the
rule of Christian reason is to choose a lesser evil.
c. Principle of Cooperation: formal and material
• Maturation
• Intellectual Development
• Temperament
• Experience of contrast
2. External
• Familial: love and nurturance, discipline, and training, parental values and examples.
III. INTEGRATION
Louis Munden’s classification of conscience aptly summarized our thesis statement.
1. Fear Conscience: operates on the instinctive level of the person governed primarily by fear acting
only on the basis of avoidance of punishment and accepting praise or approval from authority.
2. Moral/ethical conscience: operates on basic values and not just on what is commanded by some
authority; person recognizes the moral good or evil of an act; the law or command is obeyed not with
blind deference to authority but see it and is now corresponding to one’s personal value.
3. Christian- Religious Conscience: speaks of faith illumines, clarifies, and deepens what are
perceived of value to persons; places values in context of the Gospel and faith; vertical relationship
with God.
FUNDAMENTAL LAW OF CONSCIENCE: (according to GS) to love, to do good and to avoid evil. To
use the words of Bernard Haring, it is rightly to say, “To do in love what truth demands.”
REFERENCES:
Caga, Rahul G. Biblical and Fundamental Moral Theology. Class Notes. Tagaytay City: DWST, 2006-07.
Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press,
1989.
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Volume 1: General Moral
Theology. Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1996.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1776-1801.
8
5. Sin is “No” to God’s love. At best, it is the arrogance of power.” It is rooted in the mystery of evil
from ancient times to present times. It can be illustrated in various ways. Church teaching clarifies
the reality (object, intention and reality), roots (pride, sensuality and selfishness), structure (personal,
social and original) and degree (mortal and venial) of sin.
Outline:
I. Personal Sin
II. Original Sin
III. Social Structural Sin
IV. Sources of Sin
V. Degrees of Sin: Mortal & Venial…Criteria for Mortal Sin
I. Personal Sin
A. Definition and Nature
• It is the refusal to follow one’s conscience whose call brings one to good.
• Breaking the covenant with God (turning away from Him) who is the absolute good.
• It is an offence against reason, truth and right conscience
• It is a failure in genuine love for God and neighbor cause by a perverse attachment to
certain goods. It wounds the nature of man and injuries human dignity or solidarity.
• “It is an utterance, a deed or a desire contrary to the eternal law.
• Gula: “It is an arrogance of power.” The capacity to influence a change in others or
situations, whether for good or evil.
B. Biblical Understanding
• OT. Missing the mark: rebellion, transgression, or disobedience
• NT. The sin of the world: A no to God’s love, will and salvation
E. Division of Sin
1. Internal Sin: Sins that are consummated in the mind. They are sins of the heart. They
arise form evil dispositions and desires.
Mental complacency in sinful imagination
Sinful joy in an accomplished evil deed. Sinful regret of not having
performed an evil act.
Evil desire. Wish to perform a sinful action
Prejudice or bias. Tendency to eliminate one’s considerations and decision
data that are perceived to be potential threats to one’s well being.
G. Roots of Sins
o Pride
o Sensuality
o Selfishness
It is the mystery of iniquity that entered the world in the original fall and that dramatically
unfolds itself down the ages. It works in each one of us, so that our personal sins can be
considered its manifestation. Original sin is not simply the fact that each person is inclined to
follow the bad example of his predecessors. It drives from the basic solidarity of each
individual with evil of corporate life.
10
C. The Church
o The Church is an imperfect reality, but the church itself is the agent and growth
toward holiness.
o We are brother’s keepers, and we are responsible to each other.
o Every person we meet is a sacrament of God, his image.
o All sins are forgivable except the sins against the Holy Spirit: God, who created
with you, will not save you without you” St. Agustine
A. Temptation
It is the incitement acting upon the person to do evil. It is the attraction by the good that in
the larger context of the entire hierarchy of values constitutes an evil.
B. Seduction
It is a deliberate effort to lead others to sin. It is a sin against charity and the moral duty
whose violation is caused. It presupposes that the seduced person is lead to an action that
stands in contradiction to his/her original personal intention or mind.
C. Scandal
It is a conduct of individuals or groups by which they tempt others to evil more or less
imputable.
Active scandal: any conduct that give rise to another person’s sin even if this conduct is
lawful or justified.
Passive scandal: it is a taking of scandal at the provocative action of another. Scandal due
to bad example and sinful evil deeds, scandal of the weak, lawful action with evil
appearance. Pharisaic scandal; rightful action whose provoking effects is due only to the
malice of the person who is incited to sin.
Three conditions need to be present for a sin to be mortal; if small matter or one of the other two
is lacking it is venial.
D. Mortal Sin
o Sin that leads to spiritual death
o It destroys charityin the heart of man by a grave violation of God’s law. It turns
man away from God, his ultimate end and beatitude, by preferring and inferior
good to him.
o Three conditions: grave matter, full consent and full knowledge.
E. Venial Sin
It is a transgression of God’s law in a light (small matter) or of God’s law in a
grave matter but without full knowledge or full consent.
11
It does not deprive the sinner of sanctifying grace, friendship with God, charity,
and eternal happiness.
REFERENCES:
Caga, Rahul G. Biblical and Fundamental Moral Theology. Class Notes. Tagaytay City: DWST, 2006-07.
Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press,
1989.
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Volume 1: General Moral
Theology. Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1996.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1846-1876.
6. The Scriptural Word of God is the point of reference of contemporary Moral Theology (“soul of
Moral Theology”). The use of Scripture in Moral Theology has gone through various changes: “Proof
text” method, biblical fundamentalism, Scripture as “revealed morality” and as “revealed reality.”
Relating Scripture and Moral Theology in a critical fashion has four tasks: exegetical, hermeneutical,
methodological and theological tasks.
OUTLINE
1. CRITERIA FOR MORAL JUDGMENT
2. USE OF SCRIPTURE IN MT: TWO EXTREMES
3. FUNCTIONS OF THE SCRIPTURE
4. FOUR TASKS
B. REVEALED MORALITY
This is the prescriptive (or normative) function of the Scripture (e.g., Ten Commandments, Wisdom
sayings) by offering an authoritative guidance for judgment and behavior.
4. FOUR TASKS
A. EXEGETICAL TASK. Determine what the text means in its original setting (the author’s intention).
B. HERMENEUTIC TASK. Seeks to establish the meaning of the text for today (application).
MAGISTERIUM (“The Servant of the Word”)
It is the Official Teaching Authority of the Church.
12
It is formed by Pope and college of bishops in communion with him.
Three responsibilities: Listening, Teaching, Guarding.
C. METHODOLOGICAL TASK. The use of the Scripture within the various levels of moral reflection.
D. THEOLOGICAL TASK. Ways to combine the Bible with other sources of moral wisdom.
REFERENCES:
Caga, Rahul G. Biblical and Fundamental Moral Theology. Class Notes. Tagaytay City: DWST, 2006-07.
Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press,
1989.
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Volume 1: General Moral
Theology. Manila: Divine Word Publications, 1996.
A. FIRST COMMANDMENT
I am the lord your God. You shall not have other gods besides me.
I t is our duties towards God arising from his Oneness and Lordship.
This is the most important commandment; all other commandments are derived and governed.
God calls every person to share in His love through a life of Faith, Hope and Charity.
a. Fruits of the 1st Com. Liberating truth: basis of personal freedom, unity, trust, love.
b. Duties. It is the recognition of God's Lordship expressed in filial devotion and service. Prayer, Worship,
Virtue of
religion (adoration, prayer, sacrifice, religious vow and human rights, religious freedom).
c. Prohibitions. Idolatry (no carved images), Superstition, Atheism, Agnosticism.
B. SECOND COMMANDMENT
It commands reverence for God's holy name, which represents God himself.
It means rejecting blasphemy, cursing, taking false oaths.
C. THIRD COMMANDMENT
It enjoins us to keep holy the day set aside to rest in the Lord, in God’s presence for divine worship
and fellowship.
The source relates to the Sabbath rest of God from his creative actions.
The ultimate goal of the Sabbath is the fellowship with God the creator.
The Sabbath is a symbol of the final celebration and rest which is the conclusion/fulfillment of all
God's work.
a. Reasons for the Sabbath. God's rest on the seventh day; Liberation from slavery in Egypt.
13
b. Importance of the Lord's Day (Sunday). Easter: New Sabbath; Sunday Eucharist; Resting in God's
presence.
c. Duties. To worship as community on Sunday; Observance of the Lord’s Day.
d. Ethics of Grace. It prevents us from absolutizing our own achievements, heightened anxiety, hyper
activism, successorientation,
workaholism.
1ST COMMANDMENT
1. They protect the absolute value of God.
2. Faith in God. The fundamental value is the belief in God of whom we are his image and likeness.
3. There is also a value in the veneration of religious images.
4. Adoration is for God alone; Veneration is for sacred images; Hyper-dulia is veneration to Mary and
the saints.
The 1-3rd Coms. are ab/ the relationship w/ God.
The 4-10th Coms. are ab/ the relationship with one’s neighbor.
2ND COMMANDMENT
1. Giving name means having dominion on things.
2. To value the name of God who has dominion over all things.
3RD COMMANDMENT
1. To protect the Day of the Lord; Resting in God's presence.
2. To value of God above all things.
3. Ethics of Grace.
8. The fourth to the tenth commandments call us to protect, defend and enhance the values of
marriage and family life, human life in all its stages, human sexuality and chastity, truth, justice, the
right to private property and the universal destination of the earth's goods, desire for God and
poverty of heart.
The TC constitute the basic imperatives needed for moral life in the community.
The values of the TC can be grounded in their historical origin: covenantal character and liberating
power.
The TC are the terms of the covenant; they are “Ten Commitments” (Fr. A. Ceresko).
The TC are part of the redemptive plan of God (i.e., salvation history).
14
God as liberator: “I, the Lord, am your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of
slavery” (Ex. 20:2).
This preamble sets us free of all enslavement by nature (nature worship), by history (historical
fatalism), or by death (bondage of fear of death).
III. THE TEN COMMANDMENTS ARE A CONSISTENT PATTERN FOR CHRISTIAN MORAL
LIVING
They provide:
a. Credible and durable moral norms for everyday life.
b. A pattern and structure for living according to Christ's Commandments to love God (1-3) and neighbor
(4-10).
c. A universally accessible source for relating to non-Christians in matters of morals.
The fourth to the tenth commandments call us to defend, and enhance the values of marriage and
family life, human life in all its stages, human sexuality and chastity, truth, justice, the right to
private property and the universal destinationof the earth’s goods, desire for God and poverty of
heart.
THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT: BRIDGE BETWEEN FIRST THREE AND LAST
SEVEN COMMANDMENTS
“Bridge” because it is in the family that we first discover “God” and “neighbor.”
The most fundamental way we love our neighbor is to respect human lives in general.
Life is not an absolute value (only moral integrity is as such) but the necessary condition for actively
loving others and for receiving their love as well.
Following Christ means doing all in our power to defend, maintain, and promote the dignity and
value of human life.
Respect for Human Life is expressed in two commandments: 4th Honor your father and mother. The
origin of human person. Responsibility for the transmission of human life. 5th You shall not kill. The
value of any human life. Responsibility for the quality of human life.
Fourth Commandment
DISCUSSION
Obligation of children to take care of their aged parents. Aged parents are not evaluated in terms of
productivity.
Both parents are to receive equal-respect and honour.
a. Not all fathers and mothers act as booing parents to avoid child abuse.
b. Children distancing from their parents (e.g., in period of growing up). It needs parental presence and
understanding.
c. Generation gap (inability of parents to communicate with children and vice versa).
d. Parental Absence (e.g., going abroad).
15
a. Covenant relationship. Calling family members to mutual love (w/in and w/out the family).
The 6, 7th Coms. are about our outward actions: our relationship w/ our neighbor.
The 9, 10th Coms. are about our inner desires/dispositions of the heart (…w/ ourselves).
b. Domestic Church. Family shares in the communion of live and love of the persons of the Holy Trinity.
c. Foundation for civil society. Family nourishes the existence and development of the society itself.
3. Family Relationships
a. Filial respect for parents: Children showing proper gratitude, affection, respect, obedience, and care.
b. Parental respect and responsibility for children.
c. Duties as Christian parents, the transmission of faith.
a. To learn to communicate with one another openly and deeply (communion task).
b. To be willing to admit errors (humility).
c. The whole family must look beyond itself to strive to offer Christian witness (mission task).
Fifth Commandment
DISCUSSION
It forbids direct attacks against human life and physical integrity.
It protects God's gift of life and promotes practical care and respect for the life and dignity of all
persons.
The basis for the extraordinary value of human life is God.
The basic value: God alone is the ultimate Lord and master of life.
NB: Jesus Perfected and Intensified this commandment (“Love your enemies;” “Love one another as I have
loved you.”)
1. General Offenses against Life. Murder, Genocide, Abortion, Euthanasia, Willful suicide.
3. Violations against integrity of the human person. Mutilation, Physical/Metal torture, Undue psychological
pressures.
4. Offenses against human dignity. Misery, Arbitrary imprisonment, Human trafficking, Deportation,
Prostitution.
5. Some important issues. Hatred and anger, Morality of self-defense, Just war, Death penalty.
6. Response for Christians. Work for peace (cf. Pacem in Terris, John XXIII)
The 6th and the 9th commandments deal with the respect for human sexuality in two areas:
DISCUSSION
It is connected to the 9th com. (same value, family, but the 6th is ab/ outward act while the 9th is
about inward attitude).
It forbids married persons from entering into sexual union with someone other than their spouse.
It points to an enduring bond and mutual commitment between a man and a woman (a communion
of life and love).
1. Aim: Protection of two main values: Marriage (covenant relationship) and Family.
3. Offenses: Adultery, Divorce, Fornication, Rape, Polygamy, Incest, De facto unions, Homosexuality,
Same-sex marriages.
B. Ninth Commandments
DISCUSSION
The interior root/source of the sin of adultery: the covetousness of the heart.
From the heart evil designs stem (e.g., Murder, Adulterous conduct, Fornication, Stealing, False
witness, Blasphemy).
Covetousness - It is an inner impulse of the heart, a human desire and power which can lead to the
selfish taking of what rightfully belongs to one's neighbors (Lust of the flesh, Lust of the eyes and
mind, Pride.)
1. Aim: Protection of the value of Chastity (“purity of heart”) vs. covetousness (derived from
concupiscence).
2. Offenses: (vs. conjugal love, sexual integrity). Lust, Homosexuality, Masturbation, Prostitution,
Fornication,
Pornography.
3. Virtue of Chastity
a. The purity of the body (orthopraxis), heart (orthopathia), mind (orthodoxy). Our internal dispositions and
external acts.
b. The integrity of one's sexuality.
17
b. Channels sexual energies.
c. Seeks sobriety and Self-control.
a. Contraception. Artificial means of contraception or birth control; to encourage natural family planning.
b. Masturbation. An abuse of sexual power.
c. Homosexuality. Grave impediment to integral sexual growth. Distinction bet/ Homosexual orientation and
act.
d. Prostitution and pornography. They are directly opposed by the virtue of chastity and purity of heart.
Prostitution. It robs one’s dignity as a person by being reduced to a mere means of other’s selfish pleasure.
Pornography. It propagates sexual indecency in a dehumanizing and exploitative manner.
A. Seventh Commandment
DISCUSSION
It is connected to the 10th commandment, protecting the same values (esp. the right to private
property).
While the 7th is ab/ outward action, the 10th deals w/ inward attitude (i.e., interior force).
1. Values Protected. Private Property or private ownership, Common good, Universal destination of earth’s
goods, Social
Justice, Preferential option for the poor, Dignity and integrity of creation.
2. Offence. Theft, Robbery, Kidnapping, Embezzlement, False Pretenses, Graft and Corruption, Social
mortgages,
Pollution, Unjust wages.
B. Tenth Commandment
You shall not covet your neighbor’s house… nor anything else that belongs to him.
DISCUSSION
It deals with the inner disordered desires of the human heart from wh/ stealing and exploitation of
our neighbor arise.
18
rights.
c. Solutions
a. Concretization of human rights (in the Economic, Social, Political, Religious spheres).
b. Building Just Society is a primary duty of all Catholics.
Eighth Commandment
DISCUSSION
This commandment must be understood in the context of the covenant.
It is ab/ the value of Truth which makes one free.
Truth is a value per se
1. Obligations: To Seek the truth, Pursue the truth, Give witness to the truth (greatest witness: Martyrdom).
2. Offenses (vs. Truth). Lying, Detraction, Calumny, Slander, Tale-bearing, Gossiping.
3. Other Important Issues. Professional secrecy, Seal of confession, Duty of the Mass Media to promote
the truth.
9. The beatitudes present an alternative culture and life style. They provide a “blueprint” of Christian
living towards
holiness. While law is a fundamental source of Christian morality, there are priority values rooted in
the gospel, grace, love, life and salvation.
1. Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of God.
2. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
3. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the land.
4. Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
5. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall attain mercy.
6. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
7. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
8. Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven. Blessed
are you when
men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and
be glad, for
your reward is great in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you. (Mt 5:2-12)
19
1. Detachment from material goods and Spiritual dependence on God alone (spiritual childhood).
2. Thirst for Justice. Offering authentic human interpersonal relationship vs. self-centeredness. Working for
peace.
3. Cleanness of Heart. Single-mindedness.
FIRST BEATITUDE
Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of God.
SECOND BEATITUDE
THIRD BEATITUDE
Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the land.
Meekness. Gentleness due to the mastery of one's passions, God as the ultimate source of one's meekness of
heart.
Contemporary reading. Life based on trust in God wh/ makes one truly meek of heart.
FOURTH BEATITUDE
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
Righteous. An ethical attitude characterized by energetic and ardent longing for what is right and willed by
God.
Meaning. Blessed are those persons who desire God's righteousness.
Contemporary Reading. Authentic Christian love; Justice is the first demand of love.
FIFTH BEATITUDE
SIXTH BEATITUDE
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
20
Pure of heart. Those who are upright, sincere, totally single-minded; Promise of intimacy and communion
with God.
Contemporary Reading. Called to be “pure of heart” in the midst of life’s challenges relying on God for
solace/liberation.
SEVENTH BEATITUDE
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Shalom.
Human condition where people live in compete harmony with themselves, w/ others, w/ nature and w/ God;
Perfect contentment and total well-being.
Peacemakers.
Toiling actively vs. forces that violate peace; to them the Promise of blessedness, not to the “peacekeepers.”
Contemporary Reading.
It teaches us that peace must be built on the authentic human values of love, justice and truth;
Not a mere silence of guns, or absence of conflict, but on opening of hearts, respect of human dignity,
healing, etc.
EIGHT BEATITUDE
Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven. Blessed
are you when
men revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. Rejoice and
be glad, for
your reward is great in heaven, for so men persecuted the prophets who were before you.
Content.
It is ab/ the treatment that awaits the faithful disciple (revilement, persecution, and calumny) for Jesus’ sake.
Contemporary Reading. All of us are called to live our Christian faith, only to a few are given special honor
of dying for it.
10. Moral Theology has three ethical systems: deontology, teleology and relational responsibility
systems. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. However, the process of arriving at a moral
decision is a significant area of concern. Discernment of spirits is one of the many ways to arrive at a
moral decision.
A. Utilitarianism
B. Prudential Personalism
C. Rule Proportionalism
D. Consequentialism
21
POINTS OF REFERENCE FOR DECISION. It is not in duty or laws but in Consequences. Here
alternatives are weighed against
each other to determine which produces the greatest possible value in their consequences.
ADVANTAGE. It takes seriously the future implications.
WEAKNESS. It substitutes a part of morality (consequences) for the whole.
UTILITARIANISM. Morality is achieved by the greatest good for the greatest number.
STRENGTH
* It realizes that all human behavior must be judged in the context of actual relationships.
* It accounts for the complexity and ambiguity.
* Highlights moral meaning.
* Acknowledges the person’s ability.
* Does not accept imposing the meaning from external authority.
* Moral meaning can be found in the context of person and in the process of ongoing interaction.
* Emphasizes character formation, virtue and moral discernment.
MEANING:
Relationship with God.
22
Discernment refers to the quality of perception and the capacity to discriminate degrees of
importance among various features before making a judgment.
Involves keenness of perception, sensitivities, affectivities and capacities for empathy, subtlety, and
imagination.
Matter of heart.
Requires fuller use of the virtue of prudence and the theology of moral conscience.
Prudence is the virtue which enables a person to discover the best way to do the right action (St.
Thomas).
IMPORTANCE: Discernment gives a central place to the person over norms as the locus for discovering
the call of God.
THEOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS:
PROCESS OF DISCERNMENT:
a) Prayer. Discernment begins with prayer, it is sustained by prayer and follows upon prayer.
- Basic element
- Daily experience
- God’s presence and action in our lives
- Spiritual liberty
c) Confirmation
Internal. The internal signs of confirmation are the affective experiences of consolation or desolation.
External. The Community (esp. those responsible w/in) confirms the decision; e.g.: Community-Rector-
Ordination.
LIMITS
- Depends on Psychological and Spiritual maturity.
- Quality of prayer.
- Clarity of perceptions of the situation.
- Accuracy of the information we gather.
11. Christian morality consists in living a discipleship in mission of Jesus. It relies on the single deposit
of faith. The Word of God in Tradition and Sacred Scripture. The Magisterium guides the Church in
its role as communal support, active formative agent, and bearer of moral tradition and community of
moral deliberation. Nevertheless, in its official teaching the Church recognizes the possibility of
dissent as a means to clarify teachings.
A. SACRED SCRIPTURE
23
1. It is the norma non normata
2. Christian Morality relies on the Single Deposit of Faith, i.e., the Word of God in: Sacred Scripture and
Sacred (or Living Tradition.
3.Approaches.
B. CHURCH TEACHING
Religious Assent.
Allowed dissent but w/ Submission of Mind and Will.
Here disagreement is only acc/ to specific Criteria & Guidelines.
Types of Law
a. Eternal or Divine Law.
b. Natural Law (participation in the Divine Law).
c. Positive or Human Law.
d. Moral Norms.
E. CHRISTIAN VIRTUE OF EPIKEIA. Discerning human law not according to its letter but to its spirit.
Magisterium is an institutionalized authority in matters of Faith, Morals (and Worship). The primary
responsibility of the
Magisterium is to help us understand the Gospel for our time and to foster our assimilation of its basic
values.
MAGISTERIUM (“The Servant of the Word”)
It is the Official Teaching Authority of the Church.
It is formed by Pope and college of bishops in communion w/ him.
24
Three responsibilities: Listening, Teaching, Guarding.
LG 25: "Although the bishops individually do not enjoy the prerogative of infallibility, they nevertheless
proclaim the
teaching of Christ infallibly, even when they are disperse throughout the world, provided that they remain in
communion
with each other and with the successor of Peter and that in authoritatively teaching on matter of faith and
morals they
agree in one judgment as that to be held definitively." E.g., Jesus is the only savior, or the Immaculate
Conception.
FOUR CONDITIONS
Communion with one another.
Authoritative episcopal teaching in matter of Faith and Morals (and Worship, since “Lex orandi, lex
credendi”).
The bishops agree in one judgment.
Judgment to be held definitively.
It must be recognized various degrees and levels of relationship to faith; e.g., Abortion (here no room for
dissent bec/ of the
solemn pronunciation of Pope JP II in Humane Vitae against, murder, euthanasia, abortion). Ab/ moral
teachings:
They are also based on Natural Law and not merely on Faith and Scripture. These teaching are removed
from the
core of Faith. They are reflections on human nature.
Issues are concerning specific, concrete, and universal moral norms existing in the midst of complex
realities. They
have less possibility of certitude.
There is about them a responsibility and rights for the Catholic theologians in general.
It pertains to critical disagreement with some aspects of a moral teaching (non-infallible authentic teaching),
but not to
the prudential judgment of applying a teaching in a situation.
THE CATHOLIC BISHOPS OF USA IN 1968 WROTE THREE CRITERIA FOR DISSENT
The reason for dissent must be serious and well-founded.
The manner in which one dissents must not impugn the teaching authority of the Church.
The dissent must be such as not to give scandal.
Assent that the faithful owe to the Extraordinary Infallible Ex Cathedra Teaching of the Magisterium in
matter of Faith
and Morals.
G 25: "In matter of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to
L
accept their
teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent of the soul."
Submission of will and mind calls for a serious effort to reach intellectual agreement that what is taught
(although
Ordinary Non-Infallible Authentic Teaching) is an expression of truth.
Submission of Mind (to know/study the teachings) & of Will (to appropriate the teachings)
There is Internal Dissent when someone is unable to accept certain aspects of the teaching as being true, but
he or she
keeps this dissent as personal internal matter.
12. What ought I to do? The process of decision-making considers the moral agent, the values, the
criteria and the culture of a given place. In the end, a decision should be lifted up in prayer.
SOCIAL-POLITICAL ETHICS
13. Diverse authors agree on the three characteristics of justice as: a social norm, approbative and
obligation. The basis of this conclusion is the study on the properties and theories of justice. The
Catholic Tradition (St. Thomas) gives further specification or application of justice namely,
attributive and proportionate (commutative, distributive, contributive/legal and social justice). Social
justice comprises different concepts of justice in view catholic social teaching.
DISCUSSION:
Despite the differing concepts about justice, authors agree on three characteristics of justice. First, justice is
a SOCIAL NORM, a directive for guiding people in their actions toward one another. Second, justice is
APPROBATIVE, i.e. judging an action to be just manifests approval of that action. Third, justice is
OBLIGATORY, meaning that judging a certain course of action to be just entails that a person in the same
situation ought to behave similarly.
Basis of Conclusion Above
Theories of Justice. There are basically three theories as to the essence of Justice: First, the POSITIVE
LAW THEORY which defines justice as conformity to the law, thereby reducing what is just to that which is
legal. Second, the SOCIAL GOOD THEORY which defines justice as doing what is useful for the social
good. And third, the NATURAL RIGHT THEORY which holds that natural rights is the ultimate basis of
justice.
Properties of Justice. Justice is characterized by certain properties which it owes to the fact that its demands
constitute basic and essential requirements for the existence and development of the human person and
society.
THE DEMANDS OF JUSTICE ARE ENFORCEABLE. Every community takes provisions and creates
authorities to enforce the rights of its members against those who disregard and violate them.
THE DEMANDS OF JUSTICE ARE OF DEFINITE AND DETERMINABLE NATURE, at least as a rule.
Insofar as justice excludes certain actions as strictly unlawful, it states in a definitive way what must be
omitted.
THE DEMANDS OF RETRIBUTION. Violated claims of justice on principle demand restitution, or at least
compensation if the damage inflicted cannot be repaired, e.g., in a case of mutilation.
In the classical definition1 of justice two basic forms of justice are distinguished: (1) ATTRIBUTIVE
JUSTICE which is justice that leaves to every person what is own by right and attributes to it what he really
is; and (2) PROPORTIONAL JUSTICE, justice that renders to every person what is due by right. But
Peschke also mentioned a third, RETRIBUTIVE or VINDICATORY JUSTICE, justice that demands
indemnification of the injured person and active punishment of the offender. This is in view of requirements
of social coexistence and human development that are also the demands of justice.
1
See Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church (CSDC), Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace (2004),
201: According to its most classic formulation, (justice) “consists in the constant and firm will to give their due [by
right] to God and neighbor.” From a subjective point of view, justice is translated into behavior that is based on the
will to recognize the other as a person, while, from an objective point of view, it constitutes the decisive criteria of
morality in the intersubjective and social sphere.
30
The proportional justice is subdivided into four subspecies:
(1) COMMUTATIVE OR CONTRACTUAL JUSTICE commands exchange of goods and services take
place according to strict equality of values (e.g., commercial exchange, just regulation of prices, just
remuneration for labor/work and insurance of contracts). It is mainly based on contracts.
(2) DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE regulates the relations of a community with its members. It demands that
benefits and burdens be distributed in the community according to the principle of proportional equality
(e.g., the gradation of direct taxes according to income), according to needs, capabilities and merits.
(3) CONTRIBUTIVE OR LEGAL JUSTICE obliges the members of a community to comply with the
demands of the common good (e.g. tax laws, social legislation, military service). It is concerned with the
general good of the community. Every person has the strict duty to contribute the share to the common
good of those communities which essentially help it in securing existence and self-realization or assist it in
the fulfillment of its obligations.
(4) SOCIAL JUSTICE2 refers to the economic welfare of social groups. As such it demands a proportionate
share for the social partners in the fruits of their economic cooperation. It demands a proportionate equitable
distribution of the wealth of a nation among the different groups and regions of a society. It speaks of human
dignity, of “proportionate share,” i.e., of the fruit of the economic process (proportionate according to one’s
contribution and responsibility; different from “proportionalism”), and of the concentration in the hand of a
minority that must be avoided.
SOURCES:
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Vol. 2. Revised Ed. 7th
Printing. Manila: Logos Publications, Inc., 2001.
14. The common goal and the existential ends of men can be realized if common good is promoted by
the society. The aim and function of society is common good. As conditions of social living, common
good will be achieved if the society promotes solidarity and subsidiarity. Society necessitates the
principles of solidarity and subsidiarity as orientation.
Outline:
I. Notion of Society
A. Definition
A.1 Wide Sense
A.2 Restricted Sense
B. Distinction between Community and Society
B.1 Community
B.2 Society
C. The main cohesive force of a Society
II. Common Good
A. Definition
B. Twofold Understanding of Common Good
C. Conditions of Social Living
D. Functions of Common Good
E. Limits of the Scope of the Common Good
2
See QA issued by Pope Pius XI in 1931 and CSDC, 202: Ever greater importance has been given to social justice,
which represents a real development in general justice that regulates social relationships according to the criterion of
observance of the law. Social justice… concerns the social, political and economic aspects and, above all, the
structural dimension of problems and their solutions.
31
III. Principle of Solidarity
A. Definition
B. The Relevance of the Principle of Solidarity
IV. Principle of Subsidiarity
A. Definition
B. Twofold Meaning
C. Range of the Principle
I. Notion of Society
A. Definition of Society
A.1 Society in the wide sense is a lasting association of men for the attainment of a common good.
Society can be divided into two necessary societies:
1. Necessary or Natural or primary societies
e.g. - Family, tribe or nation are necessitated by nature. Although men usually accept
their belonging to these societies and by free consent agree to it, they necessarily pertain to them, even if
they should dislike their being a member of them.
2. Voluntary or secondary societies, which results from freely chosen purposes
e.g. - religious societies, educational societies, joint stock companies, clubs for sports
and entertainment, etc.
A.2 Society in the restricted sense defined as a lasting association of men for the attainment of their
existential ends. This definition applies to communities necessitated by nature, to religious communities, to
educational societies, but not to join stock company or a bridge club. Only in the societies of restricted sense
impose more serious social obligations (e.g. duties of obedience) and hence are of particular interest to
moral theology.
The following are their existential ends:
Self- preservation
Self-perfection
Procreation and education of children
Promotion of common utility
Care for the welfare of one’s fellowman
Commitment to goodness and value in its transcendent form
B. Distinction between Community and Society
The term society and community are often used interchangeably, which indicates that there is no
definite distinction between them. Nevertheless the two terms imply a difference in emphasis.
B.1 Community is preferably used for associations of men which are primarily concerned with the
inner development of the group, i.e. with the building of values important for the personal growth of their
members and of mutual ties of solidarity.
B.2 Society designates association of men which are characterized by systematic organization and
external institutions (laws, administrative bodies, governing officials) for the achievement of their goals.
The state exemplifies this form of association in atypical way. But the terms are never totally
exclusive of each other. No community is possible without a minimum of external organization and no
society is possible without the minimum of solidarity and personal interest of the members in one another.
C. The main cohesive force of a Society
- is the shared values, ideals and commitments of its members. They guarantee the dignity of men,
their freedom, equality, solidarity and creative genius. The stronger the affirmation of these values, the
stronger the cohesion of community, and vise versa.
A. Definition
It signifies a bond of mutual concern and obligation. It is a firm commitment to the common good. It
makes the fraternity of men/women more concrete. The members have the responsibility for the common
good. The whole society is responsible for the Good of its members.
B. The Relevance of the principle of Solidarity
1. The strong must feel responsible for the weak
2. The weaker must do their best as well
3. A concrete mode of solidarity
4. The rich nations responsible for poorer ones.
33
15. At present, authority and obedience are perceived negatively. Yet the wisdom of authority and
obedience can be grasped in the context of human growth, service, rationality and function of
authority and formative aspect of obedience. IN case of abuse of authority, God and conscience
becomes significant
Outline
I. CONTEXT: AUTHORITY AND OBEDIENCE
II. CONTENT
Authority
A. Definition and Nature
B. Distinction
a. Personal vs. Official/Social
b. Theoretical vs. Practical
C. Authority in Scriptures
D. Reasons for Authority.
E. Functions of Authority
a. Educational
b. Functional
c. Means
E. The exercise of authority in a spirit of service
OBEDIENCE
A. Obedience in the past and present understanding
B. Obedience in the Scriptures
C. The need and value of Obedience
a. Educational Obedience
b. Functional Obedience
D. The practice of Obedience in a spirit of Co-responsibility
a. Responsible Obedience
b. Cooperative Obedience
III. INTEGRATION (Authority vs. Obedience)
I. CONTEXT:
The perception of authority and obedience in the present day milieu and its role in human development.
II. CONTENT:
Authority
A. Definition and Nature
-It is the supremacy of a person or an institution where in they are entitled to make demands to each
other for the good of an individual and of the society as well.
-Ordering and coordinating authority is necessary in the existence of any given community.
-The true and proper mission of authority as an institution is the enrichment and promotion of those
over whom it is exercised.
B. Distinction
a. Personal. Authority - The authority is based on a person’s intellectual,
professional, spiritual or moral superiority
Social Authority – Authority that is conferred by the society
b. Theoretical Authority – authority that is based on the special competence in a particular filed of
knowledge, science or religious faith. - -
- It appeals to acceptance by intellect.
Practical Authority – It is concerned with instruction for activities, prescriptions, discipline,
civil and ecclesiastical law
C. Authority in Scriptures
a. All authority is from God (Gen. 1:28, Rom.13:1)
b. Authority is for the common good (Mk.10:43-45; ; 1Pet.5;1-4; Rom.13:1-7)
D. Reasons for Authority
34
a. The special competence or skills of a person, including the obligation of helping others and the
right to acceptance.
b. That men and woman may be guided in the attainment of the common good
E. Functions of Authority
a. Educational – It assist the person in the attainment of personal maturity, independence and
responsibility (parents, teachers, pastors. etc)
b. Functional - It consist in the preservation of order in the society which may be considered as
its primordial task. (Civil government, police authority).
c. Means – By them the authority fulfills its task; primarily by persuasion of its subjects
concerning the necessity of the demands; only secondarily, may the authority have recourse to
coercion.
F. The exercise of authority in a spirit of service
Superiors must look upon their authority not as dominion but as service after the example of Christ.
They must be convinced that their subjects are nit just instruments in the achievement of goals but
rather as fellow workers who also have a direct responsibility toward God
OBEDIENCE
- It is the promptness of the will to carry out the command of somebody in authority in the spirit
responsibility.
A. Obedience in the past and present understanding
Past – It is considered as value and was held in high esteem. They had a conviction that
man attains perfection only by giving up his own will and submitting to God’s
(Scholasticism)
Present - Obedience is considered as an obstacle on the way to self realization and
creative independence. It is a necessary evil and not a virtue
B. Obedience in the Scriptures
-Obedience to fellow human is derived from basic religious attitude but it is not identical with
obedience to god from whom it flows (Acts5:29)
O.T – Obedience to the Covenant statutes is the essence of OT morality;
disobedience against them is the essence of sin.
N.T. – Obedience to the Father’s will as a characteristic of Jesus’ mission and proof of
the disciples love for Jesus.
C. The need and value of Obedience
Obedience is primarily consist in the determination to accomplish the Will of God
The limit of obedience – The obedience due to God allows disobeying human orders when they go
against natural or divine law or one’s conscience
35
III. INTEGRATION:
Authority and Obedience must not be perceive negatively or an hindrance to he development of
an individual and the society as well but rather to perceive it as a value and virtue that flows
from God for the purpose of order and coordination of the society and for the enrichment of an
individual and of the society that will to the attainment of common Good. Authority and
obedience is subject to abuse that will defeat its purpose and origin.
Sources:
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light of Vat. II, vol. 2 (Manila, Logos
Publication, 1994), 24, 48-56, 621, 525-530, 532- 541.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, “On Obedience”, #1900.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, “On Authority”, #1897-1899, 1901– 1904.
Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, #380 – 383.
Thesis #16 Despite the crises of family today: divorce, weakening of parental authority, etc., but
family life and children are still the principal source of fulfillment for people. The reason must be the
nature and functions of the family. The community of parent is oriented towards wider family and
society.
I. CONTEXT:
In this particular thesis it focuses on the family in which according to GS, 47 Family is a
primordial community, font of new life, where the human person can normally develop bodily and
spiritually in a healthy fashion. However, now a day there are many changes happening that brought it to
crisis. High rate of divorce in many nations; strongly asserting independence of spouses; increasing number
of single parent; weakening of the authority of the parents over their children; increasing step-parents;
growing practice of non-marital unions.
Despite the fact, family is still enjoying high esteem in today’s world; highest priority is attributed
to the family for meaningful life; family life and children still a principal source of happiness for people;
monogamous marriage is commonly considered the basis of family.
II. CONTENT:
A. Nature and functions of the family
The natural structure of the family as the community of parents and children: the needs and
inclinations of the child; the affections and innate tendencies of the parents; the ties of blood with all the
bodily and spiritual affinities.
a. What are the Basic Functions of the Family as the primary unity?
Economic Function:
- provision for food, shelter and clothing; the contribution of all the members is demanded; there
is a need for a responsible household management
Educational Function:
- Basic education in the family (the basic understanding of the world around them); agent of
education (primarily the parents, but also the children themselves, and the children toward their
parents).
Spiritual Religious Function:
- Exchange of ideas, faith, experience joys, and sorrows; mutual sympathy and friendship;
religious values sense of belonging.
B. Mutual rights and Obligation of Spouses:
In this context, the man and woman being bind together becomes one according to our faith. Being
bind together it presupposes also that they are united in heart and in mind. Thus, it calls for solidarity in all
needs of body and soul.
b. What are the obligations of Spouses toward each other in the context of family:
· Trust and awareness which grants a security which bridges over anxieties
· Openness to each other which makes a spouse share his or her own joys and sorrows with
the others.
· Ability to confront difficulties and differences in the Spirit of the Gospel.
· Willingness to grow continually in tolerance and forgiveness.
36
· Mutual right and duty to marital act, but also the obligation to live their sexuality with
due respect for the dignity of the other.
· Both spouses have the duty to seek after the material and spiritual welfare of the family,
though partly in different roles.
C. Parental duties:
The fact that the parents have given life to their children it is there responsibility also to rear and
protect them from any danger with loving care. As such, it is the duty of the parents to feed and help
them in their spiritual and mental development in all aspects of life.
a. What are the duties of the parents?
- A well-ordered love. Love as the fundamental parental obligation; to avoid its defects: too little
or exaggerated love harshness, undue punishments, leniency, favoritisms, over possessiveness,
lack of social contact, isolation in the family circle; to foster openness/sympathy tow/ outside
world.
- Provide for life, health and material well being of the children
Education. To look after the spiritual welfare of the child, e.g.:
a. development of the children’s personality
b. intellectual training and schooling
c. religious education and instruction
d. to help discerning about state of life and vocation.
e. to accustom children to work and to provide a profession for livelihood.
D. Parental Rights:
- They have the first and inalienable duty and right to educate their children in every aspect of
live (Vat II GE, 6).
- They have the original and primary right to determine the child’s basic religious and moral
education.
- Right to freely select schools and other educational means according to their moral and
religious outlook.
- Right to proportionate contribution from the state to the private schools of their choice.
- Right to an adequate help by the state for the upbringing of their children.
E. Limits of parental duties and right:
- Children: they are not property of parents; they have their own dignity/conscience as human
beings; right to develop an individual personality; right of freedom in matter of religion.
- State and Church in the field of schooling.
- Teachers, guardians and relatives.
F. Duties of children toward parents:
- Reverence and honor. The 4th commandment of the Decalogue; if parents are found to be
irresponsible, they will greatly hinder the development of true reverence in the child’s heart.
Reverence to parents flows fro the mystery of life, in which they are cooperators with God.
- Obedience. The former brings about the duty of obedience. The child should learn the capacity
for discrimination and the right attitude towards mistaken commands.
- Love and gratitude. Because of life, livelihood, education and other benefits children owe to
their parents, there should be gratitude expressed in words and signs.
G. The concept of a wider family. (Peschke, 548 ff.)
Domestic servants and maids belong to the family in the wider sense, and the employer
should see in them more than just workers and wage earners.
What should be the attitude needed to it?
a. Duties of Justice: Both the employers and servants should follow the terms of the contract.
On the part of the employer:
- To pay just wages.
- Not to overburden the servants with work.
- To grant them a reasonable measure of free time.
- Not to dismiss them without sufficient reasons.
(Cf. CCC,, 2221 – 2231; Cf. CCC, 2214 – 2220; Peschke, p.563 ff)
On the part of the servants:
- To measure their work up to the wage benefits they received.
37
- To obey with regard to work and domestic order.
- To follow any further agreements without the bridge of contract.
III. INTEGRATION:
The family is the basic unit in the society. It is in the family where the human person fully develops
his physical, mental, and spiritual need. However the ideal views of family today becomes distorted
because of the problems that threaten the sanctity in the life of the family. That’s why there are families
who are no longer united because they themselves experience brokenness. It is obvious that the high rate of
divorce particularly in Western countries affect the life of the children and the entire families, single parent
which is common happen when a father or mother goes to abroad to earn better income to their families, the
non-marital unions and other factors that weaken the good values of the family.
It is good that the family should be protected from the different threats totally ruin the union of the
family. Parents should protect and raise there children in the Christian values. This is their primary goal as
parents and head of the family. However, children too have their own responsibility toward there parent. In
fact, this duty of the children has been stated in the 4th command in the Old Testament, to give reverence and
honor them. With this kind of attitude it shows also our obedience, love, and gratitude to our parents.
However family does not confine their duty only to there children since family in a wider sense it
includes the extended family and even to there servants/maids. It is the obligation or duty of the employer to
look for the spiritual or corporate welfare of there servants/maids….
Lastly, one could easily recognize what kind of society has through the lives of individual family
living in a certain community.
Thesis # 17
17. The power of the state (its rights and duties) is acceptable if universal common good is promoted. The
limits of its power must be viewed upon the assertion of the oppressed citizens. The rights and duties
of both the state and the citizens find clarity in the nature and origin of the state, concept, purpose
and its moral character.
I. CONCEPT OF STATE
II. ORIGIN OF STATE
A. Human nature and God
B. Need of human groups
C. Free agreement of citizens
III. PURPOSE OF THE STATE
A. Ordering function
B. Welfare function
IV. MORAL CHARACTER OF THE STATE
A. The state is part of the moral order
1. The social nature of man is created by God.
38
2. So the state is willed by God.
B. CONSEQUENCES OF THE MORAL CHARACTER OF THE STATE
1. The state can also appeal to conscience.
2. Citizens on their part are bound up to back up political authorities.
DISCUSSION
The state enjoys pre-eminence, not to mention acceptance, over all the other natural societies for the reason
that it has to take care of the universal common good of the civic community. The moral rights and duties
of the state as well as the limits of its power on the one hand and the moral rights and duties of the citizens
regarding this state on the other essentially depend on the conception of the nature and origin of the state, its
purpose and its moral character.
There are varying views of the nature of the state which impinge on common good. If the state is the “moral
universe” with the highest, even divine rights (as held by Hegel & Marx) then the power of the state is
almighty and resistance against it is immoral. Or if the state is nothing else than a servant of the well-being
of the individual, it cannot reach out to supra-individual and supra-national goals, e.g. the advancement of
less developed nations, but will be narrowed down to individualist and nationalist functions. In both cases,
common good doesn’t seem to be the main concern.
Christian philosophy, however sees the state as a servant of the common good as well as the servant of the
purpose and plan of God. It merely reflects the concept that the state is not the highest purpose of human
existence. While human beings have existential and natural rights that the state power has to respect, the
state is not merely the servant of the individual welfare and interests. Both the state and the human beings
are ultimately called to serve God’s Kingdom and his salvific plan.
SOURCE:
Peschke, Karl H. Christian Ethics; Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II. Vol. 2. Revised edition.
Manila: Logos Publications, 1994: 565-570.
The right of the state to death penalty is biblically based. Even St. Thomas argued that killing a
criminal is like amputating diseased organ of the human organism. In view of the common good, it is
lawful, but death penalty is against the value of life (human dignity), St. Thomas’ presentation must
be reinterpreted, the dynamism of Jesus’ love commandment, corrupt state has no right to death
penalty, many states abolish death penalty for humanitarian reasons, in short, it is inhuman and
unchristian.
Outline:
I. Problem: Whether the state has the right to death penalty
II. In the Sacred Scriptures:
A. In the OT
B. In the NT
III. Arguments:
A. Right of the State to Inflict Punishments
B. Reparation Theory
C. Death Penalty as a Deterrent to Crimes
40
D. Aquinas: Protection of the Common Weal
Granted that the state has the right to punish in general, it is today controverted whether it also has
the right to the death penalty. The latter right recently is often questioned on humanitarian grounds, and in
several states capital punishment has lately been abolished. Thus it must be discussed whether the state has
the right and may be also the obligation to inflict death penalty for major crimes. Holy Scriptures in the Old
Testament expressly attribute to the state both the right and the obligation of the death penalty for more
serious crimes. “For blood pollutes the land, and no expiation can be made for the land, for blood that is
shed in it, except by the blood of him who shed it” (Num. 35:33; also Gen 9:5; Ex. 21:12-25; Num. 35:16-
34). The lex talionis allows and demands the death sentence for the murderer only and excludes the abusive
killing of an innocent member of the evil-doers clan by blood revenge, as was the frequent practice in
ancient times. Besides murder other serious crimes are punished with death, e.g. blasphemy, grave sexual
offences, idolatry, etc. Later Judaism however shows more and more restraint in the application of the death
penalty.
Since the New Testament is the perfection of the Old, the regulations of the Old Law cannot, without
further examination, be applied to the present order of grace. The NT is less explicit than the OT.
Nevertheless it nowhere denies the state the right to capital punishment. In his trial before Pilate, Jesus does
not contest the governor’s authority over life and death (Jn. 19:10f). And Rom 13:4 doubtless presumes the
authority of the state to penalize with the sword. “If you do wrong, be afraid, for he (the person in authority)
does not bear the sword in vain; he is the servant of God to execute his wrath on the wrongdoer.” From this
teaching of the Bible as well as from the entire Christian tradition we must conclude that the state in
principle has the right to inflict capital punishment for serious crimes. Also today, “and this is valid without
distinction of confessions, no questioning in principle has come to pass yet, at most a declaration of the
inopportuneness of its application.”
The reasons listed for the right of the state to impose punishments in general do not all equally prove
the right to inflict the death penalty as well. The transgressor is not able to be reformed by this penalty.
Nevertheless if he accepts his death in a spirit of atonement for the irresponsibility of his actions, his dignity
as a moral being will be restored. (In 1976, convicted murderer Gary Gilmore successfully insisted on his
right to die for his crimes in Utah, U.S.A.) This can still be considered a reformation of the criminal, which
is of a profound social and religious significance.
The reparation theory requires that the wound inflicted on the body politic should be repaired by him
who caused it, the graver the wound, the graver satisfaction required. People have often judged that the most
commensurate atonement for very serious crimes should be the death of the criminal. If however a
community concludes that under the concrete conditions of the time other severe forms of expiation can
restore justice and suffice as atonement for even very grave crimes, it is up to the prudent judgment of a
nation to substitute other punishments for the death penalty. Two additional factors would argue in favor of
such a substitution if possible: first, the great difficulty of completely excluding the execution of an innocent
person, and second, the difficulty of drawing a clear-cut line between sanity and insanity.
As to the deterrent effect of the difficulty, criminologists question whether it is any greater than that
of other grave penalties (e.g. of lifelong imprisonment). The validity of this objection however still needs
further careful examination. A comparison is often made between states which have abolished the death
penalty and others which theoretically still retain but hardly ever inflict it. On this condition it cannot be
surprising that the deterrent effect in the latter states is no greater than in the states which have abolished the
penalty. But in states where the death penalty is still inflicted resolutely and therefore a real threat to the
criminal, the crime rate seems to be reduced effectively. The effectiveness of the deterrence, namely, is
generally stronger the greater the chance is that a crime will be avenged with the threatened penalty. The
strong and very common conviction of people of all times that the death penalty is a deterrent and that
criminals fear death more than lifelong imprisonment might not be just a plain deception after all.
Of special importance in this question is the argument taken from the protection of the common
weal. (Cf. Thomas Aquinas, S. Th. II-II. Q. 64, a. 2: Killing a criminal that is a danger to the community and
of a corrupting influence in it is like amputating a diseased member of the human organism, and so is
lawful, even praiseworthy for the common good.) Criminals who seriously endanger the welfare of other
citizens and of the community have to be hindered from their pernicious activity. Whether this necessity to
protect the public requires the death of the criminal or not, depends on the question whether his death is the
only efficient and morally possible means of safeguarding the life and well-being of the community of
41
citizens. (Opponents of capital punishment sometimes argue that in this case the man is being used as a mere
means, which is judged inadmissible. But Kant himself, the author of the maxim, does not see a contrariety
between the principle and capital punishment, which he upholds. So does Hegel.)That means in its
consequences: different penalties can be justified for the same crime at different times and in different
circumstances (e.g. peace and war). The death penalty can be both justified and necessary in certain
circumstances; in other circumstances it may not be necessary. That largely depends on whether or not a
state is morally in the condition to keep the criminals under safe detention.
The argument from the defense of the common weal also holds for insane persons who endanger the
life of others. If a community is not in a condition to provide for a secure detention, as e.g. in primitive
societies, the right to self-defense of the community would also justify the killing of a dangerous lunatic.
Even though in his case no formal crime is had, he is nevertheless a materially unjust aggressor against the
life of others, although after his capture for the time being only a potential one.
Under the presupposition that the state is able to protect the common weal against crime just as well
by other penalties as by capital punishment, the latter can in principle be substituted by those other
penalties. For it cannot be proved that the state must unconditionally avail itself of the right to inflict the
death penalty; although it is not equally evident that the state is even obliged to abolish the death penalty in
this case altogether. But wherever the death penalty is in force, sufficient precautions must be taken that an
error of law and a judicial murder be precluded. Moreover some authority in the state must have the right of
pardon to commute death sentence into other penalties. In the case of dangerous lunatics, of course, security
detention would be imperative if this rather than their death can guarantee the protection of the community.
Source:
Karl H. Peschke, Christian Ethics, pp. 584-588.
19. While the state protects citizens’ rights, the latter have their corresponding duties: love for one’s
country, civic responsibility and participation, and obligation to pay taxes. But as state authority is
exposed to the excesses and corruption of rulers, morality provides the norms on the resistance
against illegitimate rulers and even the legitimate rulers.
III. PRINCIPLES IN THE RESISTANCE VS. ILLEGITIMATE RULERS (Those who hold the
government without a just title)
a. Citizens do not owe any obedience to illegitimate rulers; they can rather fight with the legitimate power.
b. Limited obligation of obedience to the orders of the usurpers once they have gained assured control and
as long as
they are in power. Justifications:
For the sake of the common good
This does not prejudice the right of the legitimate rulers to call citizens for resistance
c. After the illegitimate rulers have attained the peaceful possession of power, their authority can become
legitimate in
the course of time.
Necessity to spare the civic community for further disasters and instability
A tyrant can never become legitimate
43
former authority cannot claim legitimacy anymore [in case of revolution]
A
IV. RESISTANCE VS. LEGITIMATE RULERS
God is the supreme authority.
Obedience to the state authority has its limit in Natural Law, Divine Law and common good.
Means of resistance:
1. Utilization of the legally afforded means
2. Passive Resistance: Non-violent refusal to obey laws if the laws are against Divine Law, Natural Law,
common good,
or the fundamental values of human life.
3. Active Resistance: Organized defense against the abuse of state authority
a) Non-violent forms
Mobilizing the public opinion.
Appealing to higher juridical tribunal.
Mass demonstrations.
General strike.
b) Violent resistance
1) Reasons for violent resistance
Natural Law: safeguard human rights.
State authority should promote the common good.
Moral theology: right to self defense in imminent and violent aggression.
2) Conditions for violent resistance
Gross continued and widespread abuse of civil authority against the essential freedom and common
good.
All peaceful and non-violent means of resistance have been exhausted without success.
There must be a well-founded hope that the violent resistance will prove successful and that the civil
conditions will not worsen.
Limitation of force to the necessary and sufficient measure.
The decision must be made by the person acknowledged as representative of the community.
20. The church cannot just too spiritualistic and ascetical to the extent of denying the affairs of the
world, politics and human rights. The church must be in the world. The harmonious and equitable
relation between church and state must follow some basic guidelines and the appropriate
understanding of the two institutions.
Outline:
I. The Church
II. Tasks of the Church’s Authority
1. Teacher of the Divine Truth
2. Mediator between God and Man
3. Building of the Christian community
4. The Church as servant in her ministry
III. Church and State
1. Basic Principle
2. Guidelines for the relations between Church and State
i. The Church has the right to work and to govern herself in full
Freedom from state intervention.
ii. The Church does not posses any political power over the temporal
Order.
iii. The State does not posses any authority over the spiritual, religious
Order.
iv. The Church posses a plenary teaching office, which also extends
Over the moral laws governing political life.
v. The State has the right and duty to protect religious freedom and to
Promote conditions favorable to religious life.
44
IV. The Church is the Conscience of the Nation
V. Religious Tolerance
I. The Church
The joy and hope, the grief and anguish of the men of our time, especially of those who are poor or
afflicted in anyway, are the joy and hope, the grief and anguish of the followers of Christ as well.3 In the
midst of mankind and in the world the church is the sacrament of God’s love and hope. She inspires and
sustains every authentic undertaking for and commitment to human liberation and advancement.4 Thus, as
minister of salvation, the Church is not in the abstract nor in a merely spiritual dimension, but in the context
of the history and of the world in which man lives.5
V. RELIGIOUS TOLERANCE
The choice of religion is a matter of conscience. Religious tolerance is not a mere indifferentism (all
the religions are the same), but is to respect the beliefs of all especially of other religious groups. The state
should intervene against abuses of the freedom of religion and conscience.
_________________________________________________
Karl H. Peschke, Chrsitian Ethics Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II vol. 2 p615-
ECONOMIC ETHICS
21. Human beings have the right: to work and to just recompense or just wage, to protection and
social security, but these rights can only be deserving if our moral duties to work, of conscientious
preparation for one’s professions will be faithfully complied.
Outline
A. Rights of Human beings
a. Right to work
b. Right to just recompense or just wage
c. Right to protection and social security
d. Right to organized and to strike
B. Duties of Human beings
a. Duties to work
b. Duties of conscientious preparation for one’s professions
46
a. RIGHT TO WORK
Vatican II asserts the right to work (GS 67). This right follows from man’s right and obligation of self-
preservation, support his dependants and from his calling to cooperate with God in the plan of creation.
Right to work refers to any kind of work whether paid and unpaid. “It is duty of society… to help citizens
and opportunities for adequate employment.”6 (GS 67). Those who are able and willing to work and who
depend on their wage for their livelihood cannot find employment; they have a claim to be assisted by the
community. The right to existence also gives them the right to the necessary means for it. Unemployment
gives psychological problem to a person because they begin to loose their sense of worth and human
dignity.7
6
Vat II Doc. Gaudium et Spes, 67.
7
Karl H. Peschke, Christian Ethics: Moral Theology in the Light Vatican II. Vol. II Rev. Ed. (Sta. Cruz: Divine Word
Publication), 641.
8
Peschke, 643.
9
Peschke, 647.
10
Peschke,650-654.
47
life. Work here is universal duty. It is an obligation towards the different communities which contribute to
the welfare of a person. It is a duty towards God, who created man to govern the world and to bring creation
to perfection.11
22. Liberal capitalism, Marxist socialism, social market economy and democratic socialism are
different thoughts that provides us with different economic view/theories are insufficient and
unacceptable to catholic social teaching but some views agree with the material basic orientation.
Two fundamentally opposed social theories have greatly influenced society and economy in the
contemporary age: liberal capitalism and Marxist socialism. Liberal capitalism is a radical liberalism. The
main theory of liberal capitalism centers on the demand for the greatest possible economic freedom of the
individual from state authority and from moral values: free enterprise, free competition, and free trade. This
is merely based on Profit or Utilitarianism. The law of supply and demand ought to regulate the entire
economic process.
11
Peschke, 638.
12
Peschke, 639.
48
he Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church opposes the first two systems (Liberal Economy and
T
Marxist Socialism).
They build upon concepts of human being, which are deficient and wrong.
The fundamental fallacy of liberal capitalism is its interpretation of economic activity as essentially
profit-oriented,
self-centered and ruthlessly competitive. Human work is valued merely as an impersonal commodity, and
the social
character of economic life is disregarded. This is the reason why the system breeds class struggle.
The principal errors of Marxist Socialism on the other hand are its global rejection of private property
and the
inability to understand the positive function of personal ownership in society and in the economic process.
From profit-oriented (exploitation) to person-oriented (service): the Church emphases economy at the
service of the person (not vice versa; for the integral solitary development of the person—the whole person
and every person especially the poor). The Church appeals to Integral Solidary Humanism.
Catholic social doctrine has found its official formulation especially in the social encyclicals and in the
documents of
Vatican II (esp. GS 63-72; 83-90):
Leo XIII: Rerum Novarum, 1891.
Pius XI: Quadragesimo Anno, 1931.
John XXII: Mater et Magistra, 1961.
Paul VI: Laborem Exercens, 1967.
John Paul II: Sollicitudo Rei Socialis, 1981; Centesimus annus, 1991.
Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace: Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, 2004.
Compendium, 160: The permanent principles of the Church's social doctrine constitute the very heart of
Catholic social teaching. These principles, the expression of the whole truth about man known by reason
and faith, are born of “the encounter of the Gospel message and of its demands summarized in the supreme
commandment of love of God and neighbor in justice with the problems emanating from the life of society.
These are the principles of:
1. The dignity of the human person (the foundation of all the other principles and content of the Church's
social doctrine).
2. The common good.
3. Subsidiarity.
4. Solidarity.
Source:
Peschke, Crhistian ethics
23. The state plays a vital role in the specification of the economic ethical norms of justice: the value
of principle subsidiarity, creation of just institutions , option for the poor and socialization of land
reform. It must guard entrepreneurs to be servants of the common good and outline consumer ethics.
I. PRINCIPLE OF SUBSIDIARITY
A. The Principle of Subsidiarity states that social institutions have an auxiliary and complimentary function
concerning the
tasks and needs of the smaller groupings and individuals in helping them to achieve their goal/end (see,
Quadragesimo
Anno, Pius XI, 1931: This principle is the most important principle of “social philosophy.”7). That means to
say that on the
one hand societies must leave to the smaller groupings or individuals what they can do by their own power;
and that on
the other hand they must assist the smaller groupings or individuals where they are unable to accomplish a
necessary or
at least useful task. It protects:
1. The particular rights and competence of individuals against excessive domination by societies.
2. The competence of minor associations against oppressive and totalitarian claims of the larger society.
B. TWOFOLD MEANING:
1. Negative Role: The State should leave to the individuals and groups what they can do by themselves.
2. Positive Role: The State must subsidize where the individual and groups cannot do by themselves.
C. RANGE OF THE PRINCIPLE
1. As much individual responsibility as possible
2. As much intervention of the State as needed.
3. At present, authority and obedience are perceived negatively. Yet the wisdom of authority and obedience
can be
grasped in the context of human growth, service, rationality and function of authority and the formative
aspect of
obedience. In case of abuse of authority, God and conscience becomes significant.
Outline
A. Fundamental orientation for an ethics of the environment
a. Love of nature
b. Reverence of nature
c. Moderation and sef-limitation
Sources:
Karl H. Peschke, Chrsitian Ethics Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II vol. 2 p615-
25. These have different meanings: Sex, Sexuality, Sexual Orientation, Sexual Identity, and Gender:
Outline:
I. Context
II. Content
Sex’s common designation
Meaning of sexuality
Sexual orientation
Sexual identity
Gender
Gender identity
I. CONTEXT:
The thesis statement is about __________________________.
II. CONTENT:
53
1. Sex has two common designations:
A. The biological aspect of one’s personhood, the individual’s biological make-up based on the
appearance of genitals.
B. Genital behaviors, i.e., what we feel, think, and do sexually.
2. Sexuality:
• It encompasses both sex, i.e., who we are and what we think, feel and do sexually, as well as the
meanings given to sex.
• “What our body means to us, how we understand our self as a woman or as a man, the way we
feel comfortable in expressing affection- these are part of our sexuality… in the broadest sense,
sexuality is how we make sex significant (whitehead and whitehead, 1989: 45).
• It does not necessarily include genital intercourse or related sexual practices. Husband and wife
express their sexuality in their sexual practices.
3. Sexual Orientation/ Preference
• Sexual orientation refers to the emotional and erotic preference for the category of people hetero-
sexual, homosexual or bisexual- an individual prefers to relate to sexually or intimately.
4. Sexual Identity:
• Sexual identity refers to the individual’s self-identification as heterosexual, gay lesbian, or
bisexual. “Self- identification” is the operative word which is indicative or whether the
individual considers him/herself as male or female.
• Sexual identity is related to but different from gender identity.
5. Gender:
• A socially constructed designation.
Gender Identity:
• Gender identity refers to the individual’s subjective sense of being a man or woman. It is the
individual’s inner sense of self as a man or woman.
• “Sex without love can be or might be morally objectionable, but love without sex is possible.”
Chastity or celibacy is not against sexuality.
Source:
Lecture of Fr. Danilo Tiong
26. There are limitations of sexual love. There is the reality of human sexuality. The human person
has to recognize the and accept there in order to be moral in the sexual life.
a. Context:
This thesis statement focuses on the sexual love. Sexual love is first exalted as a human value,
because love itself is not only a value but a virtue and we cannot disregard its value. Second, it is willed by
the Creator, shares Himself with us, in His image and likeness, and He is the origin of love.
b. Content:
c. Gen. 1:27 “God created man… created them”. The human being is God’s image differentiated in two
sexes.
the human person is created good.
sexuality, as a gift of God is wholly acceptable
Person’s nature must primarily be understood from the nature of God, and not from
the nature of animal.
* Being the image and likeness of God, the human being, comprised of his/her sexuality, is wholly
life-giving and love-giving.
27. The meaning of human sexuality can be found in, and is therefore the moral basis of both the Old an
New Testaments.
I. CONTENT:
1. Biblical View: Old Testament
“God created man… created them.” Genesis 1:27
- The human being is God’s image in differentiated in two sexes.
A. Human being:
a. The entire person is created good.
b. Sexuality as a gift of God, is wholly acceptable.
c. Person’s nature must primarily be understood from the nature of God, and not from the
nature of the animal.
d. Being the image and likeness of God, the human being, comprised of his/ her sexuality, is
wholly life-giving and love-giving.
B. The purpose of sexuality:
a. Procreation (Genesis 1:28)
b. Mutual companionship (Genesis 2:18)
c. To complete (completion) each other (the sexes) (Genesis 2:21ff)
- The completion of each other is both biological and spiritual. This completion and mutual
companionship culminate in the mutual self-giving by which they form so intimate a union that they
can be called “oneself “. (Genesis 2:24)
C. Because of sin:
a. Safe of integrity is lost
b. The entire order of creation is disturbed
c. The relationship of the sexes is disturbed
d. The carefree naturalness of the sexes in their mutual relationship is lost.
• Sexuality is experienced as a vulnerable possession which man must protect against abuse by
others and also by himself.
2. Biblical View: New Testament
o Jesus Christ treated women equally with men
o The early church was concerned with self-control and discipline in sexual life
o Formation and adultery are listed as vices and are condemned (1 Thes 4:48; 1 Cor 6:9 ff)
o Christians must sanctify their bodies and sexuality because they are the Temple of the Holy Spirit (!
Cor 6:13-20).
o Married people are to maintain mutual love for each other (1Pet 3:1-7), and there is parallelism
between the bond that unless Christ with the church and the bond of marriage. (Eph 5:21-33)
55
o There is no recommendation of virginity.
Resources:
#28 Sexual love has its own nature, purpose and social aspect.
Pleasure is not the purpose/aim of sexual function. Pleasure is the divine instituted allurement
of human being to use their sexual powers and thereby to maintain and to propagate life in purpose
or aim.
J. Grundel: “Sexuality cannot and may not become purely the means to private satisfaction of
instinct or a sort of available drug. It gives a man a goal beyond himself.”
- that is the love to be given away.
56
c. Sexual relation give life to children who are the future of the community, a sound family life
is a essential condition for the guarantee of a healthy youth.
d. Human sexuality possesses specific qualities which demand a control of it’s energies for
social living.
#29. The human person’s sexuality created by God. As a part of the human being’s physical
existence, the Christian attitude towards sex and sexuality is exercised through values and
virtues.
Thesis Statement: Human sexuality as a gift of God. It has to be expressed in line with Christian values
and virtues.
Outline:
1. Two important concepts in the thesis statement
a. Sexuality of the human person
i. Sexuality means how one understands her/his self as a woman or as a man. It is the way
one feels comfortable in expressing affection, it is how one makes sex significant.13
Essay:
Therefore, since human sexuality is a gift from God, Christian attitude towards sex and sexuality
must be rendered with respect, reverence and modesty.
Why? Because of the very nature, purpose and social aspect of sexually power. Sexual power as
such is a creation of God and not of man.
So, it demands respect, reverence and modesty.
30. There are general ethical considerations that have to be made regarding sterility/ infertility,
parenthood, children, and procreation itself. With these considerations, there are moral problems
connected with assisted reproductive technology including infertility work-up.
I. CONTEXT
The thesis statement is about the ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY (ART). Sterility,
infertility, and impotency are disvalues. Disvalues does not mean no value at all. What we mean here is
sterility, infertility, and impotence cannot produce pregnancy. They have their worth.
II. CONTENT
13
Whitehead & Whitehead, 1989: p.45
14
CCC 1965.
57
Sterility. Infertility (of either one) is incapacity to engender. Impotency (of the male) is the
incapacity to copulate; it can make marriage invalid according to Canon Law.
a. Woman:
i.) Anatomical defects (e.g., uterus could not sustain/ maintain any kind of pregnancy)
ii.) Physiological defects (e.g., eggs are not healthy or unfertilized)
b. Man:
i.) Anatomical defects (e.g., penis is somewhat curved).
ii.) Physiological defects (e.g., low sperm cells)
DISTINCTION:
1. Artificial Insemination [AI] (in vitro fertilization). The semen is injected.
(fertilization) inside the womb of the wife.
2. In Vitro Fertilization [IVF]. Sperm and egg meet externally, “in vitro” (i.e., outside
any maternal body/womb).
CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Separation of the transmission of life from the conjugal act.
2. Separation of the transmission of life from the framework of marriage.
3. Treatment of zygotes (especially zygote wastage when they are not anymore
needed)
4. The manner of obtaining the semen (through masturbation or coitus interruptus)
5. The gestation of human life outside the maternal body ( in case of in vitro
fertilization).
6. The risk of genetic inbreeding (i.e., in artificial insemination by a donor [AID],
artificial insemination of a husband [AIH] or in vitro).
7. The risk of transmission of genetic defects, diseases, and other disorders that may
affect the offspring.
B. ETHICAL PROBLEMS IN FERTILITY WORK-UPS
Fertility Work-ups involve masturbation and/ or coitus interruptus to obtain semen for
analysis. Masturbation and coitus interruptus are traditionally considered immoral by Church teaching
because they are intrinsically evil. The Church recommends the following in order to obtain semen for
analysis:
1. Use of perforated condom. Medical problem: condom has chemicals (consequently
the semen is no longer “pure”)
2. Aspiration from the testicles (by epididymis). Problem: it is painful.
3. Massage of the seminal vesicles.
4. Use of a vaginal cap.
5. Use of a cervical spoon.
III. INTEGRATION
A. MAIN PRINCIPLES (Church Teaching in General Terms)
a. The human being is to be respected and treated as a person (dignity and defense of human life)
from the moment of conception. The Church believes that human life starts from the moment of conception.
b. Transmission of human life should be within the framework of indissoluble marriage. (i.e.,
legitimate marriage).
c. The two meanings of conjugal act (unitive as mutual love-giving, and procreation as life-giving)
are inseparably connected and they can’t be separated (this is the main reason why morally speaking ART is
questionable).
d. The right of spouses is not to have a child (parenting) per se, but to the natural/ physical acts
ordained to procreation.
(John Paul II)
1. Because if it is the right of the spouses, the children become properties of parents that anytime can be
disposed.
58
2. Implication: if the spouse cant’ have children, they are not allowed to go to reproductive technology
because they don’t have the right to have children. Further, children will be reduced to objects of possession.
e. The child has the right to be conceived and brought into the world within marriage and from
marriage (illegitimacy is a social stigma).
f. Masturbation and coitus interruptus (withdrawal) are morally unquestionable and unacceptable.
B. EVALUATION IN GENERAL
a. The methods recommended by the Church are relatively ineffective from the technical viewpoint.
b. The methods are invasive (they go inside the body). Medicine rejects those.
c. Offensive from aesthetic criteria.
d. Physicians (majority of them) reject these methods for reasons of technical efficacy and avoidance
of invasiveness. How can semen be obtained morally without being invasive and retaining the fullness of
life of the spermatozoa and obtaining full efficacy?
C. THE NEED
There is a need to consider the alternatives of infertility/ sterility other than other artificial
procreation/ fertilization (ART).
Parenthood is within the context of marriage (the child has the right to be legitimate).
Children/offspring are values in themselves and not merely useful good; they are not just “products” of
technology. Procreation is a gift; a grace of participation in God’s work of creation (that’s why parents are
called as “co-creators”).
31. The common procedures of assisted reproductive technology are artificial insemination and in-
vitro fertilization. Both procedures have their own respective medical indications.
I. Context
The thesis statement is about________________________
II. Content
1. Methods
a. In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) or Embryo Transfer (ET): meeting “in vitro” of the gametes.
(It is not morally acceptable because it is outside the meaning of the sexual act)
b. Artificial Insemination (AI)
1. The sperm previously collected is transferred into the genital tracts of the woman
1.1 Heterologous (AID): the gametes come from at least one donor other than the
spouses who are joined in marriage. (It is not morally acceptable because it is
outside marriage)
1.2 Homologous (AIH): the gametes from the two spouses joined in marriage.
(surrogate motherhood)
2. Principle
Human procreation take place within the context of marriage (whether civil or religious)
because:
a. The procreation of a new person must be the fruit and the sign of the mutual
self-giving of the spouses (their mutual love and fidelity).
b. The child has the right to be conceived, carried in the womb brought into the
world and brought up within marriage.
c. The child is a confirmation and completion of parent’s mutual self-giving
d. The good of the children and parents contributes to the good of civil society.
(i.e. family as foundation of society)
Does the Church accept AI? Yes, but under certain conditions.
a) Those cases in which the technical means is not suitable for the conjugal act but serves to
facilitate and to help so that the act attains its natural purpose.
b) The meanings (unitive and reproductive) of the conjugal act can’t be separated from each
other. The unity and procreative meaning must always go together.
c) The act itself has really a purpose which is procreation.
60
g) The relationship of husband and wife must be considered. Children are the binding force
between intimacy and love of husband and wife.
.32. Artificial Insemination by the husband is morally acceptable in some cases. In-vitro fertilization is
all together morally objectionable.
I. Context
The thesis statement is about__________________
Outline:
i. Reproductive technology: Artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization
ii. The artificial insemination and in-vitro fertilization
a. Two kinds of artificial insemination
1. Artificial insemination by donor (AID)
2. Artificial insemination from the husband (AIH)
b. In-vitro fertilization (IVF)
1. What is in-vitro fertilization?
2. The third party (donor)
3. Moral status of the embro
iii. Conclusion
II. Content
This kinds of artificial insemination is also known as heterologous insemination where in the
sperm is obtained from a donor or third party other than the husband. This kind of insemination
raises lots of questions and possibility, one of which resulted to the in-vitro fertilization.
61
a. In the case of unmarried woman: In the moral perspective such action would deprive the
child of the right to have a family and a father from the very start even with the consent
of the husband. Such condition is always a loss to the child and injustice to the young
human being. The right of the child to be brought in a healthy and normal family must
also decidedly enter into a healthy and normal family. Thus such procreation in these
circumstance is a serious infringement upon the natural rights of the infants.
b. In the case of married: It requires the consent of the husband that will guarantee the
basic acceptance of the child ; but the danger that the initial consent of the husband
might later yield to ambivalent feelings toward the child; the wife might feel no joy for
the child connected to the feeling of the husband; instead of being a bond of unity, the
child might become a source of division, insecurity and anxiety; about the donor of the
sperm, will he also be responsible for the child for procreation?
C. In-vitro fertilization:
1. In-vitro fertilization (IVF) is a technique in which egg cells are fertilized by sperm
outside the woman’s womb, in vitro. IVF is a major treatment in fertility when other
methods of assisted reproductive technology have failed. The process involves
hormonally controlling the ovulatory process, removing ova (eggs0 from the
woman’s ovaries and letting sperm fertilize them in a fluid medium. The fertilized
egg (zygote) is then transferred to the patient’s uterus with the intent to establish a
successful pregnancy.
The term in vitro, from the Latin root meaning in glass, is used because early biological
experiments involving cultivation of tissues outside the living organism from which they came, were carried
out in the glass containers such as beakers, test tubes, or petri dishes. Today, the term in vitro is used to refer
to any biological procedure that is performed outside the organism if would normally be occurring in, to
distinguish it from an in vivo procedure, where the tissue remain inside the living organism within which it
is normally found. A colloquial term for babies conceived as the result of IVF, test tube babies, refers to the
tube-shaped containers in chemistry labs and biology labs. However in vitro fertilization is usually
performed in the shallower containers called petri dishes. (Petri dishes may also be made of plastic resins.)
However, the IVF method of Autologous Endometrical Coculture is actually performed on organic material,
but is yet called in vitro.
62
The IVF process requires sperm, eggs, a uterus and a bed. To achieve a pregnancy any of these
requirements can be provided by a third person: third party reproduction. This has created additional
ethical and legal concerns. The use of IVF provides also greater range of options for single people
and same-sex couples wishing to have children. Although both groups already raise children, IVF
facilitates this process. Some people object that this could give psychological problems to the child if
they grow up without a mother/father. Thus it eliminates the traditional/natural mother-father role to
the child.
III. Integration:
Pope John II in the international meetings of scientists in Rome (1982) expressed his
position regarding the new reproductive technology, specifically on IVF. He said “ I condemn, in the most
explicit and formal way, experimental manipulation of human embryo, since the human being, from
conception to death, cannot be exploited for any purpose whatsoever.” (Shannon p.112). The basic problem
of the new reproductive technology plays on the basic emotion and human rhetoric of “playing god”,
“tempting with nature,” “immoral means to good end.”
In the book of Thomas Shannon, “Bio-Ethics” he enumerated some problems tampered by
adhering to this new reproductive technology. He said as follows: “NRT touch on some very basic human
values, marriage and the family, parenting, genealogy, self-identity of the child, human sexual intimacy and
even the sanctity of life itself.” Tampering of basic human values would always shake our very dignity as
human. There are certain boundaries of nature that science must be respected, not because of near
sightedness but because of its sacredness. Things that are sacred and dignified in itself must not be wasted.
However then, the Church and the society must widen their horizon to develop and mature.
63
The conjugal role of being a husband and wife is decisively not transferrable and the right of
the child for normal and dignified family is irrevocable!
33. There is a difference in meaning of responsible parenthood, birth regulation, family planning and
they are connected with one another.
Outline:
1. responsible parenthood and birth regulations
2. the principles and methods
a. responsible parenthood
i. rights and obligations of the parents
ii. justification for a limitation of the number of children
b. natural family planning
i. rhythm method
ii. billings method
c. other means of birth control
i. onanism
ii. local mechanical and chemical means
iii. hormonal means
iv. operative sterilization
3. conclusion
Content:
1. responsible parenthood and birth control
Children are gift from God. The baby is a fulfilment of human matrimony and pride of their
parents. But the growing population raises the question of the justification or even need of birth control.
This requires a clear understanding of responsible parenthood and limitation of birth control.
64
ii. billing method or mucus method
basis of the method is the circumstance that the body of the woman discharges cervical
mucus as fertility approaches. The method consists in the observation of this mucus. When
the wetness caused by the mucus stops, 3 days are to be counted; the safe days once again
begin in the evening of the third day. (Peschke, vol 2. p.503). It is easy to remember than the
calendar method. The simplest clue is that when wet, the woman is fertile and it dry she is
infertile.
Integration
The contribution which the church can bring to the solution of the population problem is evident.
She has to proclaim the values of human dignity and freedom, the need for every human being to
live in modest comfort adm the need for fraternal solidarity and cooperation on the local, national,
and international planes. The church can do much to bring about the conditions in which free
responsible decision is possible on the part of the individual couples by the process of proper
education, formal and informal. The judgment of the church on certain methods of birth control
should not appear as a negative stance but as spotlighting the value of openness to life which is
necessary to uphold the inestimable value of human life.
34. Sterilization is either direct or indirect. Catholic Moral Theology does not allow direct
sterilization but allows indirect sterilization.
I. CONTEXT:
The thesis statement deals with one of the many issues in the reproductive ethics, namely
sterilization; and the official Catholic teaching on that issue will mentioned clearly that the Catholic
Church allows indirect sterilization.
II. CONTENT:
First of all, before getting deeply the teachings of the Catholic Church, we have to understand the
following questions;
a. What is sterilization?
b. What is Direct Sterilization?
c. What is Indirect Sterilization?
65
STERILIZATION – is understood as a kind of surgical procedure in order to prevent pregnancy as
ligation for women and vasectomy for men. Then the purpose of procedure of direct sterilization is
to render the patient infertile; whereas one of the results as a side-effect medical treatment of the
indirect sterilization is aimed at the specific pathology affecting a person.
Thirdly, in such a spirit, we look into some cases of Indirect Sterilization morally permissible by the
Catholic Church.
1. Primary gonadal pathology; oophorectomy (excision/removal of ovary).
2. Hysterectomy is permitted when it is judged to be a necessary means of removing some
serious uterine pathological condition (e.g., cancer of the uterus). In these cases, the
pathological condition of each patient must be considered individually. Care must be
taken that a hysterectomy is NOT performed merely as a contraceptive measure (case to
case consideration).
a. Hysterectomy in the presence of pregnancy and even before fetal viability, is
permitted when directed to the removal of the dangerous pathological condition of
the uterus of such serious nature that the operation cannot be safely postponed
until the fetus is viable (Principle of Double Effect).
b. Hysterectomy for prolapsed (in case of hernia) of the uterus (cutting, incision,
displacement of the uterus downward, sometime outside the vulva). However,
before making this final decision, the following considerations will have to be
made;
i. A possible conservative repair so that pregnancy can still be possible
even if it is difficult.
ii. The patient’s choice, in order to come up with this decision, the patient
must be completely and honestly informed.
iii. The trauma and expense of conservative surgery, with the likelihood of
a less that a fully satisfactory result.
iv. Each case is an individual case, and so it cannot be generalized or held
to be true in all cases. Each case depends on the details of each case;
prudent judgment of the gynecologist; the reasonable wishes of the
informed patient.
c. Elective hysterectomy following a bilateral “oophorectomy.” The following are
the reasons why it may be morally justified;
i. If the ovaries are removed, pregnancy in possible. So the uterus is also
removed in order to leave a “clean pelvis” as preservation from the
future possible cancer at the uterus.
ii. With oophorectomy, the uterus is rendered functionless.
iii. This is morally justified by the Principle of Totality.
iv. Usually this is done in order to avoid any Pathological condition of the
uterus in the future.
66
v. It is understood that this procedure involves no real additional surgical
risk.
vi. It does not additionally impair the functional integrity of the patient.
III. INTEGRATION:
Certain of surgical procedure to prevent pregnancy, particularly ligation for women and vasectomy
for men, is called sterilization. By using the Principles of Double Effect and of Totality, the
Catholic Church solely allows indirect sterilization without denying the dignity of a human person
that is the focus of the Fundamental Moral Theology.
35. Ligation is a case of contention between two sides one of which is the side of the Church. The other
side thinks that ligation can be morally acceptable in certain cases.
1. What is Ligation?
Ligation is also known as Operative Sterilization. It is a sterilization of women effected by tube ligation,
tube section or electro coagulation. For man it is called vasectomy. Medically it has the advantage that after
sterilization conception is impossible. It is to be noted that permanent sterilization can be experienced and
judged as impotence, especially on the part of men.
Ligation is morally permissible when the uterus is damaged due to multiple caesarean section
deliveries. It can happen due to several caesarean section deliveries the uterus weakens or its walls thin out.
So the premises for the moral acceptability of tubal ligation are the following, when the uterus is badly
damaged and when the uterus cannot be repaired to support another pregnancy safely. Another case of
situation wherein tubal ligation may be morally acceptable is in gravidcardiac patients. If and when it is
already determined that the subsequent pregnancy of this kind of patient can be fatal to her, ligation may be
done to ensure that pregnancy will not occur.
c. Ethical/Moral dilemma:
Ligation or hysterectomy? To isolate the uterus or remove it? It is simpler to isolate it, but what is
important is to make the uterus no longer capable to support pregnancy. For the Doctor’s side, ligation is
morally acceptable option if the clinical condition of the patient contra indicates the added trauma of total
hysterectomy. It is simpler in procedure, less risky to the heart of the patient and less expensive.
Hysterectomy is a major surgical operation and would require general total anesthesia for its performance.
It is rather risky for heart patient to undergo general total anesthesia. Ligation is the more humane
procedure. Let it be clear though that ligation and/or hysterectomy are never morally allowed for direct
67
contraceptive sterilization. On the other hand, the Church favors Hysterectomy as morally acceptable option
because of the damaged and dangerous tissue within the uterus itself.
Bibliography:
Peschke, Karl, Christian Ethics Moral Theology in the Light of Vatican II, Logos Publications, Inc.,
Manila 2001; Pp506-510.
36. Bioethics is a specific ethical science but related to the ethical sciences. It goes beyond ethical
issues in medicine so that it has its own scope or issue area.
Outline:
Bio-ethics
• Basics of bio-ethics
• Scope of bio-ethics
• Examples
• Issue areas of bio-ethics
Bio-ethics is basically the systematic study of human conduct in the areas of life sciences and of health care
insofar as that conduct is examined from the view point of moral values and principles. It studies the human
body or life itself and makes use of the moral values and principles.
The scope of Bio-ethics goes beyond ethical issues in medicine to include issues in public health, population
concerns, genetics, environmental health, reproduction practice and technologies, animal health and welfare
and the like.
Example:
- Medical issues: respirators – euthanasia
- Public health: Vaccination – affectivity and safety when brought to far flung baranggays.
- Genetics: Altering of characteristics ( eg, height, skin, colour)
- Reproduction: Artificial incrimination, in-vitro fertilization
- Animal health: Animal rights
- Environmental: Waste management
Question 37: The subject of Bio-ethics is basically the human person. The human person is to be
understood in its generic meaning and at the same time in the context of health care and Bio-ethics. The
guiding vision in looking at the human person and considering all his/her aspects as a human being is
an authentically humanizing ethics.
68
Outline:
Bio-ethics
• Context of bio-ethics
• Content of bio-ethics
• Authentically humanizing ethics
• Integration
Context: The subject of Bio-ethics is basically the human person and the object of Bio-ethics is the human
Personal Action as related in the health sciences and health care. It is to be noted that authentically
humanizing ethics means an ethics that effectively helps concrete human beings achieve the full
development and expression of his humanity in each historical situation that he finds himself in.
Content:
I. Historical View on the Human Person
1. Ancient Times: The Human thought was primarily concerned with nature of which human kind was
seen to be a part.
Scholastic = Man is a rational animal
- focuses on very philosophical aspects of it, not on the social
- fails to see the implications of slavery and prostitution
- do not consider the essence of the human person (esp. Greeks). They considered the human person
philosophically but failed to see the human dignity.
2. Medieval Times: The Human person thought emphasized the plan of God in which humankind had a
major role to fulfil.
3. Contemporary Times: The human being asks who is and what meaning his life may have and he sees
the world in terms of its consequences for the human person.
- Man asks: Who am I? What am I doing here? What is life leading to? What is it for?
- Human person seen as part of human society
Integration: The dignity of the human person is the structural nucleus of ethics. There is an ethical demand
towards human dignity and this response has its scope of reference. This same response is also given to the
concrete authentically humanizing ethics.
Source: The source of questions 36 and 37 are from our class notes in bio-ethics from Fr. Tiong
38) The Dignity of the Human Person is the structural nucleus of ethics. There is an ethical demand
towards human dignity and this response has its scope of reference. This same response is also given
to the concrete dimensions of human personhood.
69
B. Basis of the Dignity of Human Person
C. Scope of Human Dignity that Needs corresponding Respect
A. This is in the sense that moral life is basically the actualization of what it means to be a person in
relation to other persons and sentient beings (living creatures including God). Thus, sin is
degradation of one’s dignity and always. Respect for the dignity of all persons and each person is
the necessary condition for all morally good attitudes and acts. Respect is the moral response to
human dignity: both the sacred and profane aspects of the human person must be fully respected.
B. Every human person is created by God in his image and likeness(Gen. 1:27); every human
person is endowed with intelligence to know and free will to decide and to choose; the creation
of the human soul is a direct action of God; every human person is called into existence in
relation to God since conception; each human person is unique and irreplaceable; each human
person is called to maturity and eternal life.
C. Scope of human dignity that needs corresponding respect: a) Concrete: in the sense that it refers
not to abstract human nature, but to concrete and actual human beings immersed in complex and
conflictive historical reality; b) Universal: it applies to all peoples of all nations, races, castes or
other social groupings beyond geographical, political, racial, cultural boundaries; no distinction
among people at all; c) Egalitarian: it affirms the equality of all human persons in dignity,
rejecting all discriminations and any arbitrary criteria, whether this is based on race, religion,
sex, ideology, generation, social class and so on; d) Absolute: because it inheres in human
persons precisely as persons, and not for what they possess, not for what they can give, not for
their physical, intellectual and social capabilities, but for what they are as persons. The human
person is valuable most of all because he is a person; he is an end in himself and should never be
used or manipulated as a mere means for another end; e) Partisan: in favor for those who suffer
dehumanizing situation. It is a preferential option in practice in favor of the liberation of those
human beings whose humanity has been disfigured by dehumanizing situation e.g. the oppressed,
the destitute and the other marginalized persons.
Source:
39. The most efficacious way and the best way of showing respect to a human person and if he/she is a
patient, is through the principles of autonomy and free and informed consent.
OUTLINE
CONTENT
70
The patient, being a human person deserves respect because of his or her dignity. This respect is a
necessary condition for all morally good attitudes and acts. This dignity is based upon the conviction that
every man/woman is created by God in his image and likeness, endowed with intelligence to know and a
free will to decide and choose; his or her soul is a direction action of God and is called into existence in
relation to God; unique and irreplaceable, called to maturity and to eternal life. This respect should be:
1. Concrete: not abstract human nature but actual,human beings in context.
2. Universal: beyond geo-political boundaries
3. Egalitarian: affirms the equality of human persons in dignity regardless of any arbitrary
criterion.
4. Absolute: the human person is valuable because he/she is a person, an end in him/herself
and not just a mere means for another end.
And is grounded on:
1. Corporeity: Humans exist corporeally. The body is the base for human consciousness an
personhood, and so participate in the dignity of the human person.
2. Social Nature: Humans by nature are social; live together and interact in society, where
rights and responsibilities are recognized; participating actively in the social and cultural
life in a relation of equality with other persons.
3. Reason and Liberty: Reason and liberty enable the human person to responsible realize
him/herself. They have a right to access to information that affects them.
4. Sacred and Profane Aspects
The human person is not purely “sacred” nor purely “profane”. Human Dignity
integrates the sacred and the profane.
a. Sacred: God has deigned to become one of us and make us His adopted children
and sharers in His divine life.
b. Profane: The human person is not an object and is an absolute value, even in a
profane or secular situation.
According to Benedict Ashley and Kevin O’ Rourke, the human person is a being with a radical
capacity for embodied intelligent freedom whether that capacity is still undeveloped or has been
frustrated by accident, disease or neglect and thus, has inalienable rights that should be ethically
respected, including those rights which relate to healthcare.
The Principles of Autonomy and Free and Informed Consent are the principles to advance a most
efficacious way of showing respect to a patient. We define Autonomy as:
II. The Principle of Autonomy
Autonomy means that one has the moral right to choose and follow one’s own plan of life. However,
there are implications to consider:
1. it does not mean absolute freedom to do anything to one’s self as one wishes.
2. the person must still follow the guidelines of moral law and conscience.
3. the person has the obligation to live according to the Creator’s plan.
4. the person’s ultimate end is God.
1. the person has the right to determine what will be done to him/her.
2. the person has a duty not to constrain another’s autonomous choices and actions
3. human beings should be treated with dignity
4. human beings should be accepted as responsible for their own actions and destinies
5. they should be allowed to make decisions for themselves
6. they have the right to determine what will be done to them
7.
Autonomy enhances the person’s worth and self-image; it protects him/her from being used and
abused by others; it develops a mature therapeutic alliance between physician and patient.
Autonomy affirms the fact that the human person is a normal chooser who acts with intentionality,
understanding and without controlling influences that determine the act/action.
71
Therefore, Autonomy is the power to design and then to implement a personal life plan by exercising
freedom responsibly in directing and regulating his/her life and actions and in particular to make use
of his own body.
Consent:
The patient can decide in voluntariness and free from coercion, undue manipulation, persuasion,
natural reactions to illness; normal circumstances of health care and influence of drugs or
alcohol.
40. There are difficulties with the type of moral argumentation used traditionally by the Church
regarding the value of human life. A proposal on how to look at the value of human life in
contemporary setting presents to see in the principle of inviolability of life, namely, the ethical aspect,
explicitation of the ethical aspect, normative formulation of the principle of the ethical value of
human life and the contribution of the Christian view.
OUTLINE:
I. Background
A. General Affirmation of the Ethical Values of Human Life
B. Exceptions to the General Principle (cf. reviewer)
II. The Difficulties with the Types of Moral Arguments Used Traditionally By the Church Regarding the
Value of Human Life
1. The Sacralization of moral argumentation has led to misuse/ manipulation of the ethical value of
human life (as evidenced in the following):
2. The Complexity and the Nuances of the Human Condition are not much taken into consideration:
3. There is an excessive confidence in public authority
4. There seems to be incoherence:
III. A Principle of Inviolability of Life/ Sanctity of Life
1.Ethical Aspect
2.Explicitation of the Ethical Aspect of the Value of Human Life
. 3.Normative Formulation of the Principle
4.Contribution of the Christian View
CONTENT:
I. Background
A. General Affirmation of the Ethical Values of Human Life
1. Christian Catholic Moral Theology has emphasized the value of human life.
2. It condemns in strong affirmations and defense of the value of human life by several
reasons:
a. Human life is a Personal Good: Taking one’s life or that of another is against
charity.
b. Human Life is a Good of the Community: Taking one’s life or that of another is
against justice
c. Human Life is a Gift from God and belongs to God: Taking one’s life or that of
another is usurping a right which belongs to God alone; “Thou shall not kill” is an expression
of God’s dominion over human life; God is the “owner” of life and the human person is just
the “steward” is a basic truth for casuistic morals.
B. Exceptions to the General Principle (cf. reviewer)
1. Indirect abortion
73
2. Indirect suicide
3. Personal Self-defense
4. Death Penalty
5. Just War
6. Death of Tyrant
II. The Difficulties with the Types of Moral Arguments Used Traditionally By the Church Regarding the
Value of Human Life
2. The Sacralization of moral argumentation has led to misuse/ manipulation of the ethical value of
human life (as evidenced in the following):
a. The commandment “thou shall not kill: became the perspective for moral discourse.
b. The argumentation regarding the value of human life became conditioned by biblical
data.
c. The ethical dimension of human life is expressed in terms of ‘sanctity’
d. The category of divine inspiration seems to justify human actions contrary to the value of
human life.
e. The right of public authority to take the life of evildoers is a concession by God to human
authority.
These imply that the value of human life resulted in some amount of manipulation of the
ethical value. The ethical dimension lost much of the autonomy of the value of human life
and the religious considerations gained ground. Finally, the critico-rational credibility is lost.
3. The Complexity and the Nuances of the Human Condition are not much taken into consideration:
a. To say that human life is a good entrusted by God to human beings for their use and for
them to benefit from reduce the moral importance of life.
b. To argue or justify on the basis on the distinction between the innocent and the evildoer is
not exact.
Who is actually responsible for some people becoming evildoers?
According to what interest are some declared “innocent” and other “evildoers?”
Who is the human being who can really set him/herself up as the supreme judge of
good and evil?
c. To base the value of human life on personal good, communitarian good and God’s
dominion over life is too simplistic. The reality of suicide, homicide, abortion,
euthanasia, capital punishment and similar problems is so complex. It is very difficult to
measure the value of human life.
4. There is an excessive confidence in public authority
5. There seems to be incoherence:
a. Principle of Double Effect – Conflict of Values
b. Contrasting Attitudes: Life of the Unborn (rejection of abortion) and life after birth (easy
justification of death penalty, war)
III. Principle of Inviolability of Life/ Sanctity of Life
1.Ethical Aspect
1.1 Human life is the fundamental vehicle of ethical values.
1.2 Human life is the object of the free realization of human beings.
1.3 Human life can be involved in a conflict with other values.
1.4 Moral integrity is the absolute ethical value, and human life is the
fundamental ethical value.
2.Explicitation of the Ethical Aspect of the Value of Human Life
2.1 Justification of the ethical value
74
2.1.1 Human Life is the pre-condition for the pursuit and attainment of other
values and is also the precondition for acting morally.
2.1.2 The preference for human life is deepened in the status of the human
being: A graced creature of God/ Redeemed by Christ/ Called to share in God’s
life/ Indwelling of the Holy Spirit in him/her.
2.2Content of the Ethical Value of Human Life:
2.2.1 The content is beyond the mere biological life.
2.2.2 The content is from its first beginning to the fullness of life.
2.2.3 The humanization of life must be to the maximum: In terms of human
life, the ethical value of human life is equal in all human beings/ the
concentration is not on the “limits” of human life but on the unfolding of all the
potentiality of human life.
2.3 The Rank of Human Life among ethical values
-Human life ranks first, next to moral integrity.
3. Normative Formulation of the Principle
There should be a normative formulation of the principle which is positive rather than
negative; existential rather than formalistic (that the concern is in the concrete consequences
rather than in the manner that it is going to reach about) and absolute but recognizes the
conflicts of values
4. Contribution of the Christian View
a. The special status of the human being
b. Human life is a fundamental value but is subordinated to moral integrity.
c. Death is a relative evil; Suffering is a relative evil – because they have redemptive value
(FROM THE NOTES OF FR.TIONG)
INTEGRATION
In the process of seeking moral grounds and solutions for various moral and ethical problems, the Church
usually utilizes traditional principles as arguments that most of the time, are out of touch with what is actual
and real, and sometimes simplifying matters by adhering to “unchanging” principles rather than considering
the details and nuances of real and complex issues. In the issue of the value of human life, reality gives the
complex and difficult and varying views about life and its value. The judeo-christian perspective is rigid in
its evaluations of moral issues like suicide and abortion, but also mentions exceptions to the rules – which at
times, contradict each other and produce confusion instead. As a proposal to clarify and affirm the essential,
the principle of the inviolability and sanctity of life is being proposed to finally establish the essential and
authentic value of human life.
41. Abortion is a generic terminology to mean the end of life of the unborn. It has to be qualified if a
moral judgment has to be made or concluded. And there are points of issue or controversy
surrounding termination of pregnancy including the term “viability” as to what it means.
I.CONTEXT
The thesis statement speak of three things:1. The meaning of abortion,2. The types or kinds of
abortion to be considered in coming up with an ethically sound moral decision and, 3. controversies/issues
that may arise in abortion including the term ‘viability.’
II. CONTENT
1.The above generic meaning of abortion may be more technically defined as:
the expulsion of a live embryo or a live but inviable fetus from the body of a pregnant woman, with
the resulting death of the embryo or fetus.
75
2. Not all abortion are morally wrong, hence the need to qualify in order to make a morally correct
judgment. It is therefore important to look into the different types of Abortion. The types of abortion
are:
Obstetrics terminology
a. Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage)- the expulsion of the non-viable fetus through natural or
accidental causes.
b. Induced (procured) – expulsion of the non-viable fetus through deliberate human intervention. This
is commonly used in obstetrics.
Church terminology
c. Direct – a deliberate action in which the only intended effect is the expulsion of a live but enviable
fetus. ( ex. Induced to an unwanted child)
d. Indirect- merely permitted, undesired or not intended but unavoidable expulsion of a live but
inviable fetus. (ex. Concomitant effect of removal of cancerous uterus of a pregnant woman)
42. In medicine, morally acceptable judgments are to be made when cases of imminent abortion
and/or inevitable abortion occur. There are also morally acceptable guidelines in cases of
maternal-fetal conflicts as in ectopic pregnancy, chorioamnionitis, hydatidiform mole,
gravidocardia, eclampsia, abruption of placenta, placenta praevia.
I. Outline
I. Definition of Abortion
II. Types of Abortion
III. Church Stand
IV. Important Principles
V. Conclusion
II. Content
Abortion is the expulsion of a live embryo, or a live but non-viable fetus from the body of a pregnant
woman, with the resulting death of the embryo or fetus. If the embryo or fetus does not die, the act would
not be categorized as abortion.
There are four general types of abortion, namely:
1. SPONTANEOUS [MISCARRIAGES]: expulsion of the non-viable fetus through natural or accidental causes.
2. INDUCED [PROCURED]: expulsion of the non-viable fetus through deliberate human intervention.
3. DIRECT: a deliberate action the only intended effect of which is the expulsion of a live but non-viable
fetus.
4. INDIRECT: merely permitted, undesired or not intended but unavoidable expulsion of a live but non-viable
fetus.
76
Christian Catholic Moral Theology has emphasized the value of Human Life. It condemns in strong terms
the offences against this value, such as suicide and homicide. It justifies its strong affirmations and defense
of the value of human life by several reasons:
a. Human Life is a Personal Good. Taking one’s life or that of another is against charity.
b. Human Life is a Good of the Community. Taking one’s life or that of another is against justice.
c. Human Life is a Gift from God and belongs to God. Taking one’s life or that of another is
usurping a right which belongs to God alone.
“Thou shall not kill” is the expression of God’s dominion over human life.
That God is the “owner” of life and the human person is just the “steward” is a basic truth for
casuistic morals.
The crucial question to ask then regarding the issue of abortion is: When does human life begin? The
church holds that at the moment of fertilization that is when the sperm fecundates the egg human life
already starts, that the fertilized egg is already as human as you and me, with equal rights and dignity.
Hence, in general the Church teaches that abortion is not morally permissible, for to do so is a direct attack
on life and a violation of a human being’s fundamental right to live.
However, the church recognizes that there could be exemptions to the general rule depending on the medical
situations of the parties concerned, specifically the mother and the fetus. Like in the case of spontaneous
abortion, obviously no one could be imputed with any immoral act since it results from an accidental and/or
a natural cause. Another is indirect abortion which is merely permitted; it is the unintended but unavoidable
expulsion of a live but non-viable fetus. Examples of these would be the following:
A. Inevitable Abortion. It is a combination of untoward factors that has affected the fetal attachment and
environment. The expulsion of the non-viable fetus has progressed to such a point that the abortion cannot
be prevented/avoided. Once there is a total separation of the placenta from the uterine wall with concomitant
fetal death, the fetus may be removed. In which case there is really no moral problem since the fetus is dead
already. A moral dilemma occurs when the placenta might be in the process of progressive separation from
the uterine wall. Inevitable and advancing separation has so irrevocably progressed that to empty the uterus
would not be actually destructive of a non-viable fetus. In this case let nature take its course. However if
there is the incapacity of judging that the separation is far advanced and inevitable, emptying the uterus is
not justified
B. Maternal-fetal Conflict occurs in cases such as ectopic pregnancy, eclampsia, abruption placentae,
etc… it is a situation wherein the life of both the mother and the fetus are in danger and a choice must be
made on whose life is to be saved. Here abortion (indirect) maybe allowed provided the following
principles are followed:
1. The life of the mother and the fetus are to be treated equally.
2. As to the question: whose life is to be preferred? There is no direct answer. The nature of the
disorder determines whose life is to be saved. (The principle is save the one who has the greater
chance of survival)
3. Principle of Inviolability of Life: there can be no direct attack either on the life of the mother or of
the unborn child)
77
Both in inevitable abortion and maternal-fetal conflicts two very important principles are used as gauge to
their permissibility namely:
Principle of double effect. This spells out the conditions under which an indirectly willed evil effect is not
imputed to the agent and therefore can be permitted. It is the principle that helps to determine whether an
action that contains some degree of pre-moral good & evil is morally right or wrong.
1. The action in itself is good or indifferent.
2. The good effect is not produced by means of the evil effect.
3. The evil effect is not directly intended.
4. A proportionate reason supports causing or tolerating the evil effect.
Principle of Proportionate Reason. It is the relationship between the specific value at stake and the pre-
moral evil (limitations, harms and inconveniences) that will inevitably come about in trying to achieve that
value.
1. The means used will not cause more harm then necessary to achieve the value.
(A value at least equal to that sacrificed is at stake).
2. No less harmful way exists at the present to protect the value.
3. The means used to achieve the value will not undermine it.
A. Ectopic Pregnancy. A pregnancy that takes place outside the womb. Abortion is acceptable if there is a
proportionate reason. For example in the case of Tubal pregnancy wherein the tube is so damaged as to
constitute a serious threat to the maternal life, the tube may be removed as Traumatized Pathological Tissue
[TPT]. Principle of Double Effect [PDF] is applied.The reason why PDF is applicable is because of the
presence of TPT. The intention is to cure the traumatized tissue not to remove the fetus. In the rare case
wherein the pregnancy has advanced to a stage approaching viability, the element of proportion in the PDE
has to be given very special consideration and attention. Proportion is between the risk of expectant
treatment for the mother and chances of the delivery of a viable fetus.
b. Eclampsia. When an expectant mother is said to be eclamptic it means she is experiencing high blood
pressure due to the presence of the fetus. Definitely, the fetus cannot be removed and invoke the principle
of double-effect for it is clearly a direct attack on the life of the fetus. What can be done is to put the mother
under medication. Now if the medicine would have a fatal effect on the fetus, the PDF may be invoked
since the drug is applied to lower the mother’s blood pressure and not to kill the fetus.
Abortion is evil. The church is very clear about that. However, the church recognizes that for some medical
reasons abortion may be morally permitted. Still the Church makes sure that life is given the dignity it
deserves through the imposition of strict guidelines and principles that must be considered whenever such
situations happen.
43. Every human person has the right to die with dignity. This can be considered to be a consequence
of the integration of three main considerations of ethical value namely, the proportionate defense and
prolongation of life, the humanization of illness and death, and the liberty of the human person.
I. Outline
I. Explanation of the three considerations of ethical value
II. Specific Case
III. Conclusion
78
II. Content
Every person has the right to die with dignity. By dying with dignity we mean that a person has to be
accorded with the following considerations of ethical value:
1. The proportionate defense and prolongation of life. A dying person has the right to all the
proportionate means available to medical science for relieving his/her suffering and prolonging
his/her life. It includes the right to medical treatment necessary for relieving severe pain, even if
such treatment may shorten his/her life which is an undesired/unintended side effect.
2. Humanization of illness and death. This right includes the right to make death a personal action. It is
not suicide because of the principle of futility/disproportionate means.
3. Liberty of the human person. The right to refuse treatment that makes his/her condition even mere
burdensome or unnecessary futile. The right to access the practice of religious beliefs connected with
illness and death.
To illustrate the points raised above I would like to sight a case, for example a man who had a very serious
car accident.
Citing “proportionate defense and prolongation of life” he would have the right to be brought to a
hospital and to be given the necessary treatment. However this treatment must not be disproportionately
costly, burdensome and painful. Also it must offer substantial hope of benefits to the patient as a person.
These guidelines are important since if there is evidence to the contrary like, if the treatment would have the
effect of causing perpetual hardship on the patient which he could not be expected to bear, or if the
treatment would cause immeasurable hardship to the people responsible for him, and lastly if the treatment
does not hold out a reasonable hope of medical benefit to the patient the treatment could be refused, for the
application of extraordinary means of treatment is not morally required. What will always be morally
required are the nourishment and hydration given to the patient, medication when there is a need, and the
care that is due to any patient.
In the second consideration of humanization of illness, the important point is that the patient gets to
own his pain and suffering. This is the reason why extra-ordinary means of treatment is not required for
these treatments do have the tendency to dehumanize the illness and even the patient. The person is to be
valued for his personhood, his total self not only his defective legs, or eyes, or heart.
Lastly, the third consideration of the patient’s liberty. The man who had the accident can refuse
treatment if it will just be burdensome and futile, in other words if the treatment would qualify as extra-
ordinary. He can very well ask to be brought home and be given care by his family there. Also he may ask
to see a priest if the guy’s catholic and avail of the sacrament of the anointing of the sick. To do so would
not be suicide, since it is not his intention to kill himself but rather to let nature take its course, and if indeed
he will die he would have died with dignity.
The death and resurrection of Jesus took the sting out of death. But still in a human and physical
sense death still has that menacing aura with it. The principles presented above however point to us a way
to stare death in the eye, to die with our total personhood intact and with our human dignity celebrated.
Source: notes on Bioethics by Fr. Tiong
44. There is a distinction between ordinary or proportionate means of treatment or procedures and
extraordinary or disproportionate means of treatment or procedures. Connected with the meaning of
these, their respective ethical guidelines on euthanasia, dysthanasia and adysthanasia.
I. CONTEXT:
The context is all about means of treatment; the ‘how’ in treating a patient.
II. CONTENT:
79
I. ORDINARY MEANS
1. Those which are not disproportionately
- costly
- burdensome
- painful
2. They must offer substantial hope of benefit to the patient as a person, not only to his liver,
lungs or heart. Man is to be valued for his personhood.
V. FUTILITY/FUTILE - used to describe any effort to achieve a result that is possible but that
reasoning or experience suggests is highly improbable and that cannot be systematically produced.
PRINCIPLE:
Clearly futile treatment is not morally required. If treatment is not medically
indicated, (i.e., useless), there is no moral obligation to treat.
CONDITIONS:
1. The patient is chronically and irreversibly comatose;
2. Treatment would merely prolong the dying process;
3. Treatment would not be effective in correcting all of the life threatening conditions;
4. Treatment would be futile in terms of physical survival;
5. Treatment would be virtually futile and inhumane;
6. The presence of an impairment that is incompatible with life and the impairment is
uncorrectable.
• Their respective ethical guidelines on euthanasia, dysthanasia and adysthanasia.:
VI. EUTHANASIA - An action or omission of an action which of itself or by intention causes death
in order that all suffering may in this way be eliminated.
Declaration on Euthanasia: Congregation of the Doctrine of Faith May 1980
OBJECTIVES/PURPOSE OF EUTHANASIA
1. Putting an end to extreme suffering (in terms of pain and burden)
2. Saving abnormal babies
3. Saving the mentally ill
4. Saving the incurably sick from the prolongation of a miserable life.
POSITIVE (ACTIVE) EUTHANASIA - Acts or omissions of acts which result in the taking
of a human being’s life, whether by direct intent or as a side-effect of some other intended
action, for reasons considered to out weigh the fundamental value of human life.
DYSTHANASIA - Holding off the death and prolonging the life of those who have no
humanly foreseeable prospects of recovery, and for this purpose, using means which are
disproportionate.
III. INTEGRATION:
MORAL STANCE:
- Means which are considered to be at the experimental stage, though considered risky,
may be used with patient’s consent.
- Dysthanasia is not morally required but not forbidden
- Indirect Positive Euthanasia is morally permissible under the principle of double
effect
Not using extraordinary means is justified because:
a. Even if the treatment is already in use, it is risky and burdensome.
b. It is an acceptance of the human condition.
c. It is a wish to avoid application of a medical procedure disproportionate to the results
that can be expected.
d. It is a desire not to impose excessive expense in the family or community.
81