Loeffler, Paul J.

English

epublications@Marquette

The Linacre QuarterlyVolume 36 | Number 1 Article 6February 1969A Clergyman's View of the Changing MoralityPaul J. LoefflerFollow this and additional works at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/lnqRecommended CitationLoeffler, Paul J. (1969) "A Clergyman's View of the Changing Morality," The Linacre Quarterly: Vol. 36 : No. 1 , Article 6.Available at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/lnq/vol36/iss1/6said that cases of pregnancy from rape are rare. In the case · of clearly established rape, there can naturally be a confl~ct between a strong emotional appeal on the one hand and on the other. the ineluctaple eternal law, "Thou shalt not kill". Of course all measures should be made available by social and governmental agencies, where indicated, for the care and comfort of the mother during and after pregnancy and for the maintenance of the child after birth, because the mother has no legal obligation in this respect. VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW So we may say that, quite aside from the moral principle, the ALI provisions are an exhibit of faulty draftsmanship, in violation of fundamental principles of law for the . protection of life. It is pertinent and shocking to compare the casual treatment of human life under the proposed abortion laws, with the legal protection afforded those guilty, or suspected, of crime for which the law imposes the penalty of imprisonment or death. The Supreme Court of the United States, in a series of decisions within the last few years, gives protection to one who is accused or suspected of crime. From the moment of J:>eing taken into the custody of the police, the services of an attorney must be supplied. He is advised ,of his legal rights. If indicted, he has a right to appear in court with his· lawyer, to have a jury, to test the qualifications of the jury, to be confronted by his accusers, and to cross examine witnesses himself or through his 52 attorney. In the case of any r ror in the trial he has the right of cppeal. And the rights proclaimed ·y the court in these cases also a: 1ly to minors. In the case of the unbor · child, however, with striking cont1 ,t, the innocent child is afforc d no protection of the right to ; ;~~ -no attorney to advise him, no gu :. dian to appear and plead his case be ,re this bizarre court composed two doctors, one of whom can be~ lme the paid executioner, no. one to a 1. ,~~eal the decision of this court. RESPONSIBILITY 0 · LA WYERS AND DOCT~" ~{S In joining in the defense ( It ~he City of God against the attack on 1; tc life of the unborn, we will be savh i.he lives of children as truly as if -Ne were rescuing them from drownL or fire. Our position must be n- .intained unflinchingly, that i n tentional abortion is an "infamy" and an "unspeakable crime." Thi .. , is not exclusively the Catholic posi '.ion for it should be joined in by all those who believe in God as the Crea"tor of life and who respect the moral 1aw. Some Catholic laymen, unft~rtunately , including doctors, la lyers and legislators (some clergy, indeed!) evade their responsibility by failing to speak out publicly. They seem to take the attitude that, "This · is a pluralistic society and if the majority want it, let them have it" or, "Why should w_e impress our morality on others." T~s is all wrong, of ' course, Catholic doctors and lawyers have a · special · responsibility to present the defense on behalf of unborn children, and to oppose any con cessions in "11beralization" of the abortion laws. Linacre QuarterlY A. Clergyman's View of the Changing Morality Rev. Paul J. Loeffler, C.M. I first received the invitation to you, the · subject given to me 'A Clergyman's View of the Morality." In the program I later received , the subject was as "The Clergys' View of the Morality." Just as I am sure re is unanimity in this llVe:nti:on on certain basic principles inel~icine, so I feel just as sure that are a great variety of techniques I feel confident, therefore, that will accept my talk as "q ~s View of the Changing , Loeffler is the director of the of St. Vincent ·DePaul, Beach, Florida. This is a Fr. Loeffler gave at the annual of the NFCPG in Miami Florida, November 30, 1968.) ,1969 suppose you take those forceps and crack the father . over the head. Then you will have wiped out the whole family." The point I wish to make is that the student probably had the same respect for life - and the preservation of mother and child as did the instructor. But due to ignorance or the lack of proper skill and technique, he was not able to preserve the basic value-human life. A physician also has the same basic will - to heal, to save, to make whole , but even the most successful among you will perhaps shudder when he reflects back upon some of his earlier operations and lack of acquired skills. So, too , in the area of morality, we know from divine revelation and/ or human reason that there are basic and absolute moral values such as "Do good and avoid evil" or in a 'more religious context, "Love God and your fellow man." God's revealed Will , however, does not give man a blueprint for every conceivable situation, nor is man, wending his pilgrim way through this world, always or perhaps ever fully attuned to God's revelation or to His Spirit. Man's moral decisions, therefore , are relative to his 53 . ' "•·· .,. ·~ : ~ • • I ' ~ ' ;· ... ·:''/ ;:,-. . ~ ... . ·.~·\ >·'· ::.'.·.:.·., , .;.. ·- ~ : : :· ~· :~ ~~ .. ~.'·;· knowledge of God's Will, to his openness . to the Spirit of God and to his own conscience, and, to a great extent, relative also to his life situation. Where, however, do we find the basic moral values, - values which are changeless and unchangeable. And, specifically, in our context, with what is Christian morality concerned? Christian morality is the study of Christ and the revelation in Christ as a Way of life. "I am the Way, the truth and the Life." Christ is both the manifestation of God to man, - and an invitation to man to give himself to God. The study of Christian morality concentrates on man's response to God in Christ through his life and behavior. I Moral decisions, i. e., · man's behavioral decisions must, first of all be God-centered. God invites; man responds. Sounds simple, doesn't it? - but here is where the problems start. 54 God invites: But -we know of this invitation through His Word- but a Word given · to us in the words of men. -we. know of this invitation through His Church, - a human as well as a divine. reality. -we know of this invitation through the voice of conscience,- fallible and at time erroneous. Man responds: Yes, but -he responds in his own life situation which is so different for different men in different times and places. -he responds, - but he and even somewhat de or conditioned by the Cl environment of which part. -he responds, - but of · fear instead of love. II Moreover, while it is invites and man who resl · nds, this invitation and response i: nediated in Christ, Who is God yes; but God clothed in human · ·~ sh. And our encounter with Ch1 t today is again mediated for u through - Word, Sacrament, an. Church. How difficult at tin . ·s is the understanding of the . ':Jrd; how . dependent on faith our ,nion with Christ in the · Sacran., l.l ts; how human the face of ti · Church. And thus, problems because of the hum~ct · and therefore fallibk elements · involved in those p .. sons and things ~hich· mediate t .. rist to us. III Finally, the invitatiol' given by God to man thro . ~h Christ involves the personal ' .:;sponse of man to God. Nor can ! ~ 1 i s personal responsibility be ab\;, ...,ated. ~e cannot morally thro 'J off this responsibility. Moral decisions, guided though they m~; st be, ~ust be our own personal decisions,Just as the decision to believe , for those of us who are of age, must be our own personal will to believe. We are not denying the words of ~· Paul "that it is God who works Ul us both to will and to accomplish", but even with the gifts of God, m a n, as ~ d . . ak' ·mal mus eciSIOn-m mg an1 , ill to himself will to believe and W . live a good and moral life . · Lin a ere QuarterlY ·morality, then, must be DO-(~em[ered, based on the life and of Christ and personal in leave aside, therefore, in our any purely humanistk on life. In the Christian , the human is inextricably and erably interwoven with the Moral questions, in our , arise from a confrontation of known Will of God as revealed in with the situation of the person wed with conscience and Most of the moral problems our day, as of any era of the history Christian life, arise from the to understand and know with the answers to the questions, is God's will for me in this ?"; "What is my answer in Dsei1ence·!";. "What should I freely to do?" The solution demands honest evaluation of all three is yet another element, on above - a very important - that must enter into our moral . Christ did not leave us alone up to the problems of moral and behavior. The authentic and appointed interpreter of the of Christ and the guide to and of Christian morality is the Church. All personal moral should be made in the light with regard to the moral wounc~entents of this Church. we speak, therefore, of a morality in a Christian we must be careful to , first of all, changes that are d into our culture by those purely humanistic or IIICiitalil~tic outlook on life and its ,1969 Secondly, we must be wary of thinking of morality as a mere system of laws of behavior. Such a morality of law or code ··morality totally ignores the personal dimension of morality, or the autonomy and competence of the educated conscience in the area of practi~al moral judgment. Ignored, also, is the fact' that the basic moral law is love, and this is found, not primarily in any external code, but in the heart of man, living in union with God. Finally, (in speaking of a changing morality), we must not allow it to be based on any self-orientation of life, as if there were no such thing as an objective moral law. Such a self-structured morality would be pure nwral anarchy. However, excluding all humanistic, authoritarian, or subjective .bases of morality, we come back to God speaking to us in Christ through His Church. The authentic teacher of Christian morality, the Church, proclaims the Gospel to us in terms of the basic law: "Love God above all things, and your neighbor as yourself'. The authentic Christian is the one who freely consents not only to accept but to live that message of love. The Church proclaims this message anew to each succeeding generation and to every · nation and culture. Evolving and developing as she is, (which is the nature of every living and non-static being), and doing so ~in a world that is ever-changing, she is constantly beset with new questions. More specifically, in t~e field of morality, the Church's proclamation of the love of God in Christ provides 55 •', ' ~~· .. '• ~ \ ' ' ', . . ~ 'I , ', the antidote to the introduction into the world of any non-christian culture or morality. She is the perennial voice crying out in the wilderness upholding the honor of God and the dignity of man. And yet, even ~ithin our Christian culture, new questions arise because of a better understanding of God's Word as given to man in the Scriptures and because of scientific advances in the knowledge of. man himself and of the universe in which he lives. Because of scientific advances in methods of interpretation, we understand better · today what the sacred writers were really saying to the men of their time, and can better appreciate the relevance of this teaching for our ~imes and culture. Because of technological advances, new moral problems arise from man's legitimate aspirations to a better life on earth. Because of medical and surgical advances, new questions are asked as to what is morally permitted when dealing with human life. For example, there came a time in the history of surgery when amputations became morally permissible because of the acquired ability to cauterize successfully. There came a time in the history of surgery when appendectomies became morally permissible because of the moral certitude of being able to save the patient's life. Recently, organ transplants have become permissible for the same reason. The same may be said when we enter other areas of scientific and professional competence. Advanced scientific knowledge raises new moral questions. 56 For the Christian seriously )triving to answer any given moral r blern, the authentic and positive tea •ling of the church should be h .; first consideration. If the specific a the specific problem is nc · there, the basis of the am certainly be discovered in ; . inciple. Put in another way, the Ch istian is obligated to form and in . 1Im his conscience according to the positive moral teaching of the Church. Conscience is supreme as · ;1e final arbiter in making a practical ·· 1dgment on the morality of one's act< ns. Man makes these moral jv lgments, however, in the realization hat God ·Who is the ultimate judge h<.· : given to him a moral gui d · -the Church- according to whm: teaching he should form his conscienc ·, The moral teaching of t l : Church must always be understood i ·" the light of the Gospel proclamation It is very understandable, therefore , 't· ~ cause of what has been already said, ~hat there is a development in this tu ching. In our day, the more positive (' i0ments of the Gospel message and its social implications, (love, justi,;c, peace, responsibility) are being given t~e pre-eminence due to tL~m. This emphasis on the message i i. ,elf cre~tes an atmosphere of changing morality. When one stresses th Gospel teaching of love and justice, is it n?t natural that the necessity for social justice and individual rights will be more clearly seen? Will not the immorality of unbridled capitalism be made more apparent? Wh h . . . to Christ's en emp as1s IS gtven teaching about peace, can we ~ content merely to talk aboU conditions for a just war? Are we n~t . . nments aU mvolved m our gover if we decision to wage war? And even Linacre QuarterlY engaged in a just war, what are we for the cause of peace? the New Testament teaching sanctity of married life is U. IIGers1tood, is there not a greater u• IIOrec:tatton of the importance of the to society? Are not the positive of human love and sexuality strengthened? n we read what God has about the dignity of human and the human person, can we ever man simply as an object? while this teaching on the dignity of man is addressed to men, it has a very special relevance men in your profession and in mine. priest mediates the Church, and Christ, in preaching the of God and Christ, and the whereby citizenship in this gdom may be acquired, lellltthcmed and completed. But it is hearers of the message who decide, · of their dignity as free , to accept or reject the ssage. The ultimate moral lp0nsil>ili1tv is theirs, not that of the analogously, the physician, life is dedicated to the use of '1969 scientific skills to preserve human life, has a service to offer. His primary moral decision concerns the necessity of the procedure and his ability to perform it with reasonable chance of success. However, since he is dealing with human life, the decision to have the operation is the moral right of the patient. Except for an operation that would be intrinsecally evil, the moral responsibility of submitting to an operation belongs to the patient. In conclusion, I should simply like to say, that, instead of speaking of "the Changing Morality", I would rather we spoke of the changing climate or atmosphere in which moral decisions are made. The basic moral law "Love God and your fellow-man" is changeless. Our understanding of the obligation of love does undergo constant development according to our advance in the understanding of God's revelation in Christ and our increasing knowledge of man and the universe·. Guided by the teaohing . Church in her ever-growing awareness of God's revelation, and by the Spirit of God to Whom our consciences must ever be open, ·we encounter life's situations and problems optimistically and without anxiety, with the words of St. Paul in our hearts, "Lord, what do you will that I do?" 57 ' ~ 'I • •, . · ' ' •': .':· " ' •, ,I ,1···. •. ~· '•. t·~ : :· ·• ,. j • • . '. ~ . • • i ~ -~· .'', ... . •. .  ' 

A Clergyman\u27s View of the Changing Morality

The Linacre QuarterlyVolume 36 | Number 1 Article 19February 1969A Clergyman's View of the Changing MoralityPaul J. LoefflerFollow this and additional works at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/lnqRecommended CitationLoeffler, Paul J. (1969) "A Clergyman's View of the Changing Morality," The Linacre Quarterly: Vol. 36 : No. 1 , Article 19.Available at: http://epublications.marquette.edu/lnq/vol36/iss1/19said that cases of pregnancy from rape are rare. In the case · of clearly established rape, there can naturally be a confl~ct between a strong emotional appeal on the one hand and on the other. the ineluctaple eternal law, "Thou shalt not kill". Of course all measures should be made available by social and governmental agencies, where indicated, for the care and comfort of the mother during and after pregnancy and for the maintenance of the child after birth, because the mother has no legal obligation in this respect. VIOLATION OF FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF LAW So we may say that, quite aside from the moral principle, the ALI provisions are an exhibit of faulty draftsmanship, in violation of fundamental principles of law for the . protection of life. It is pertinent and shocking to compare the casual treatment of human life under the proposed abortion laws, with the legal protection afforded those guilty, or suspected, of crime for which the law imposes the penalty of imprisonment or death. The Supreme Court of the United States, in a series of decisions within the last few years, gives protection to one who is accused or suspected of crime. From the moment of J:>eing taken into the custody of the police, the services of an attorney must be supplied. He is advised ,of his legal rights. If indicted, he has a right to appear in court with his· lawyer, to have a jury, to test the qualifications of the jury, to be confronted by his accusers, and to cross examine witnesses himself or through his 52 attorney. In the case of any r ror in the trial he has the right of cppeal. And the rights proclaimed ·y the court in these cases also a: 1ly to minors. In the case of the unbor · child, however, with striking cont1 ,t, the innocent child is afforc d no protection of the right to ; ;~~ -no attorney to advise him, no gu :. dian to appear and plead his case be ,re this bizarre court composed two doctors, one of whom can be~ lme the paid executioner, no. one to a 1. ,~~eal the decision of this court. RESPONSIBILITY 0 · LA WYERS AND DOCT~" ~{S In joining in the defense ( It ~he City of God against the attack on 1; tc life of the unborn, we will be savh i.he lives of children as truly as if -Ne were rescuing them from drownL or fire. Our position must be n- .intained unflinchingly, that i n tentional abortion is an "infamy" and an "unspeakable crime." Thi .. , is not exclusively the Catholic posi '.ion for it should be joined in by all those who believe in God as the Crea"tor of life and who respect the moral 1aw. Some Catholic laymen, unft~rtunately , including doctors, la lyers and legislators (some clergy, indeed!) evade their responsibility by failing to speak out publicly. They seem to take the attitude that, "This · is a pluralistic society and if the majority want it, let them have it" or, "Why should w_e impress our morality on others." T~s is all wrong, of ' course, Catholic doctors and lawyers have a · special · responsibility to present the defense on behalf of unborn children, and to oppose any con cessions in "11beralization" of the abortion laws. Linacre QuarterlY A. Clergyman's View of the Changing Morality Rev. Paul J. Loeffler, C.M. I first received the invitation to you, the · subject given to me 'A Clergyman's View of the Morality." In the program I later received , the subject was as "The Clergys' View of the Morality." Just as I am sure re is unanimity in this llVe:nti:on on certain basic principles inel~icine, so I feel just as sure that are a great variety of techniques I feel confident, therefore, that will accept my talk as "q ~s View of the Changing , Loeffler is the director of the of St. Vincent ·DePaul, Beach, Florida. This is a Fr. Loeffler gave at the annual of the NFCPG in Miami Florida, November 30, 1968.) ,1969 suppose you take those forceps and crack the father . over the head. Then you will have wiped out the whole family." The point I wish to make is that the student probably had the same respect for life - and the preservation of mother and child as did the instructor. But due to ignorance or the lack of proper skill and technique, he was not able to preserve the basic value-human life. A physician also has the same basic will - to heal, to save, to make whole , but even the most successful among you will perhaps shudder when he reflects back upon some of his earlier operations and lack of acquired skills. So, too , in the area of morality, we know from divine revelation and/ or human reason that there are basic and absolute moral values such as "Do good and avoid evil" or in a 'more religious context, "Love God and your fellow man." God's revealed Will , however, does not give man a blueprint for every conceivable situation, nor is man, wending his pilgrim way through this world, always or perhaps ever fully attuned to God's revelation or to His Spirit. Man's moral decisions, therefore , are relative to his 53 . ' "•·· .,. ·~ : ~ • • I ' ~ ' ;· ... ·:''/ ;:,-. . ~ ... . ·.~·\ >·'· ::.'.·.:.·., , .;.. ·- ~ : : :· ~· :~ ~~ .. ~.'·;· knowledge of God's Will, to his openness . to the Spirit of God and to his own conscience, and, to a great extent, relative also to his life situation. Where, however, do we find the basic moral values, - values which are changeless and unchangeable. And, specifically, in our context, with what is Christian morality concerned? Christian morality is the study of Christ and the revelation in Christ as a Way of life. "I am the Way, the truth and the Life." Christ is both the manifestation of God to man, - and an invitation to man to give himself to God. The study of Christian morality concentrates on man's response to God in Christ through his life and behavior. I Moral decisions, i. e., · man's behavioral decisions must, first of all be God-centered. God invites; man responds. Sounds simple, doesn't it? - but here is where the problems start. 54 God invites: But -we know of this invitation through His Word- but a Word given · to us in the words of men. -we. know of this invitation through His Church, - a human as well as a divine. reality. -we know of this invitation through the voice of conscience,- fallible and at time erroneous. Man responds: Yes, but -he responds in his own life situation which is so different for different men in different times and places. -he responds, - but he and even somewhat de or conditioned by the Cl environment of which part. -he responds, - but of · fear instead of love. II Moreover, while it is invites and man who resl · nds, this invitation and response i: nediated in Christ, Who is God yes; but God clothed in human · ·~ sh. And our encounter with Ch1 t today is again mediated for u through - Word, Sacrament, an. Church. How difficult at tin . ·s is the understanding of the . ':Jrd; how . dependent on faith our ,nion with Christ in the · Sacran., l.l ts; how human the face of ti · Church. And thus, problems because of the hum~ct · and therefore fallibk elements · involved in those p .. sons and things ~hich· mediate t .. rist to us. III Finally, the invitatiol' given by God to man thro . ~h Christ involves the personal ' .:;sponse of man to God. Nor can ! ~ 1 i s personal responsibility be ab\;, ...,ated. ~e cannot morally thro 'J off this responsibility. Moral decisions, guided though they m~; st be, ~ust be our own personal decisions,Just as the decision to believe , for those of us who are of age, must be our own personal will to believe. We are not denying the words of ~· Paul "that it is God who works Ul us both to will and to accomplish", but even with the gifts of God, m a n, as ~ d . . ak' ·mal mus eciSIOn-m mg an1 , ill to himself will to believe and W . live a good and moral life . · Lin a ere QuarterlY ·morality, then, must be DO-(~em[ered, based on the life and of Christ and personal in leave aside, therefore, in our any purely humanistk on life. In the Christian , the human is inextricably and erably interwoven with the Moral questions, in our , arise from a confrontation of known Will of God as revealed in with the situation of the person wed with conscience and Most of the moral problems our day, as of any era of the history Christian life, arise from the to understand and know with the answers to the questions, is God's will for me in this ?"; "What is my answer in Dsei1ence·!";. "What should I freely to do?" The solution demands honest evaluation of all three is yet another element, on above - a very important - that must enter into our moral . Christ did not leave us alone up to the problems of moral and behavior. The authentic and appointed interpreter of the of Christ and the guide to and of Christian morality is the Church. All personal moral should be made in the light with regard to the moral wounc~entents of this Church. we speak, therefore, of a morality in a Christian we must be careful to , first of all, changes that are d into our culture by those purely humanistic or IIICiitalil~tic outlook on life and its ,1969 Secondly, we must be wary of thinking of morality as a mere system of laws of behavior. Such a morality of law or code ··morality totally ignores the personal dimension of morality, or the autonomy and competence of the educated conscience in the area of practi~al moral judgment. Ignored, also, is the fact' that the basic moral law is love, and this is found, not primarily in any external code, but in the heart of man, living in union with God. Finally, (in speaking of a changing morality), we must not allow it to be based on any self-orientation of life, as if there were no such thing as an objective moral law. Such a self-structured morality would be pure nwral anarchy. However, excluding all humanistic, authoritarian, or subjective .bases of morality, we come back to God speaking to us in Christ through His Church. The authentic teacher of Christian morality, the Church, proclaims the Gospel to us in terms of the basic law: "Love God above all things, and your neighbor as yourself'. The authentic Christian is the one who freely consents not only to accept but to live that message of love. The Church proclaims this message anew to each succeeding generation and to every · nation and culture. Evolving and developing as she is, (which is the nature of every living and non-static being), and doing so ~in a world that is ever-changing, she is constantly beset with new questions. More specifically, in t~e field of morality, the Church's proclamation of the love of God in Christ provides 55 •', ' ~~· .. '• ~ \ ' ' ', . . ~ 'I , ', the antidote to the introduction into the world of any non-christian culture or morality. She is the perennial voice crying out in the wilderness upholding the honor of God and the dignity of man. And yet, even ~ithin our Christian culture, new questions arise because of a better understanding of God's Word as given to man in the Scriptures and because of scientific advances in the knowledge of. man himself and of the universe in which he lives. Because of scientific advances in methods of interpretation, we understand better · today what the sacred writers were really saying to the men of their time, and can better appreciate the relevance of this teaching for our ~imes and culture. Because of technological advances, new moral problems arise from man's legitimate aspirations to a better life on earth. Because of medical and surgical advances, new questions are asked as to what is morally permitted when dealing with human life. For example, there came a time in the history of surgery when amputations became morally permissible because of the acquired ability to cauterize successfully. There came a time in the history of surgery when appendectomies became morally permissible because of the moral certitude of being able to save the patient's life. Recently, organ transplants have become permissible for the same reason. The same may be said when we enter other areas of scientific and professional competence. Advanced scientific knowledge raises new moral questions. 56 For the Christian seriously )triving to answer any given moral r blern, the authentic and positive tea •ling of the church should be h .; first consideration. If the specific a the specific problem is nc · there, the basis of the am certainly be discovered in ; . inciple. Put in another way, the Ch istian is obligated to form and in . 1Im his conscience according to the positive moral teaching of the Church. Conscience is supreme as · ;1e final arbiter in making a practical ·· 1dgment on the morality of one's act< ns. Man makes these moral jv lgments, however, in the realization hat God ·Who is the ultimate judge h<.· : given to him a moral gui d · -the Church- according to whm: teaching he should form his conscienc ·, The moral teaching of t l : Church must always be understood i ·" the light of the Gospel proclamation It is very understandable, therefore , 't· ~ cause of what has been already said, ~hat there is a development in this tu ching. In our day, the more positive (' i0ments of the Gospel message and its social implications, (love, justi,;c, peace, responsibility) are being given t~e pre-eminence due to tL~m. This emphasis on the message i i. ,elf cre~tes an atmosphere of changing morality. When one stresses th Gospel teaching of love and justice, is it n?t natural that the necessity for social justice and individual rights will be more clearly seen? Will not the immorality of unbridled capitalism be made more apparent? Wh h . . . to Christ's en emp as1s IS gtven teaching about peace, can we ~ content merely to talk aboU conditions for a just war? Are we n~t . . nments aU mvolved m our gover if we decision to wage war? And even Linacre QuarterlY engaged in a just war, what are we for the cause of peace? the New Testament teaching sanctity of married life is U. IIGers1tood, is there not a greater u• IIOrec:tatton of the importance of the to society? Are not the positive of human love and sexuality strengthened? n we read what God has about the dignity of human and the human person, can we ever man simply as an object? while this teaching on the dignity of man is addressed to men, it has a very special relevance men in your profession and in mine. priest mediates the Church, and Christ, in preaching the of God and Christ, and the whereby citizenship in this gdom may be acquired, lellltthcmed and completed. But it is hearers of the message who decide, · of their dignity as free , to accept or reject the ssage. The ultimate moral lp0nsil>ili1tv is theirs, not that of the analogously, the physician, life is dedicated to the use of '1969 scientific skills to preserve human life, has a service to offer. His primary moral decision concerns the necessity of the procedure and his ability to perform it with reasonable chance of success. However, since he is dealing with human life, the decision to have the operation is the moral right of the patient. Except for an operation that would be intrinsecally evil, the moral responsibility of submitting to an operation belongs to the patient. In conclusion, I should simply like to say, that, instead of speaking of "the Changing Morality", I would rather we spoke of the changing climate or atmosphere in which moral decisions are made. The basic moral law "Love God and your fellow-man" is changeless. Our understanding of the obligation of love does undergo constant development according to our advance in the understanding of God's revelation in Christ and our increasing knowledge of man and the universe·. Guided by the teaohing . Church in her ever-growing awareness of God's revelation, and by the Spirit of God to Whom our consciences must ever be open, ·we encounter life's situations and problems optimistically and without anxiety, with the words of St. Paul in our hearts, "Lord, what do you will that I do?" 57 ' ~ 'I • •, . · ' ' •': .':· " ' •, ,I ,1···. •. ~· '•. t·~ : :· ·• ,. j • • . '. ~ . • • i ~ -~· .'', ... . •. .  ' 

https://epublications.marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2825&amp;context=lnq

A Clergyman\u27s View of the Changing Morality

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

epublications@Marquette

epublications@Marquette