CONTEMPORARY MORAL THEOLOGY (Theo 116)
It emphasizes
What is our point of departure? GOD
John Paul II = The moral life is a response to the many gratuitous initiatives taken by
God out of God’s love.
Parable of the Prodigal son
• A father whose love is unconditional.
• God’s love does not depend on our behavior.
• God does not force us to love Him.
Trinity as a communion of love
Mercy as a distinctive feature of Catholic Moral Theology
✓ Mercy: source of our tradition – Good Samaritan
✓ Mercy is the condition of our salvation – Mt. 25
✓ Mercy: How God enters our chaos to rescue us – we enter to the chaos of
others.
✓ Mercy: Christianity’s self-definition
The Early Church and Church Fathers
✓ The persecutions endured by the early Church were followed by a series of
heresies that rocked the Church to its foundations.
✓ From the beginning, many Christian thinkers used Greek philosophy and
tradition to help explain Christian truths.
✓ Over the course of the third to fifth centuries, Popes and bishops led the
Church through a number of Ecumenical Councils addressing new
controversies and developing new theological traditions.
✓ The Athanasian Creed (I Council of Nicaea) that emerged expresses the
Catholic belief in the three Divine Persons of the Blessed Trinity and the
1|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
Incarnation of God the Son, the Second Person of the Trinity.
the equality of each of the three persons of the Trinity.
✓ The Creed begins and ends with an anathema (a condemnation) on those who
do not accept it.
✓ Each sentence, word, and phrase of the Creed was carefully selected in order
to adequately express the Catholic Faith. While some of these terms may
seem difficult to understand, members of the early Church suffered torture,
exile, and death in order to preserve and transmit the unadulterated Deposit of
Faith.
Early Heresies
✓ St. Thomas Aquinas defines heresy as “a species of unbelief, belonging to
those who profess the Christian Faith but corrupt its dogmas.”
✓ Orthodox Catholicism derives from the Deposit of Faith (the sum of all truths
revealed in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, and entrusted to the care of
the Church).
✓ Heresy derives from the same Deposit of Faith, but denies or alters some part
of it.
✓ A person may enter into heresy in one of two ways:
• Material heresy: entered into through ignorance of the truth, or
misunderstanding or incomprehension of some aspect of the Faith.
This species is merely a mistake that needs correcting.
• Formal heresy: freely choosing, with full understanding of the
teachings of the Church, to hold doctrines that are contradictory to
those of the Church.
Arianism
✓ The first heresies were particularly dangerous because they attacked the
figure of Christ himself.
✓ Greek philosophy spoke of the logos, a term used by St. Paul referring to God
the Son. Neo-Platonic thought taught that the logos was the most exalted
creation of the Father, rather than God himself.
✓ They also viewed the material world as inferior to the world of ideas.
 ✓ Therefore, these heresies denied the divinity of Jesus, and de-emphasized, if
not denied, his humanity. They made Jesus inferior to the Father, and set the
stage for Arianism, the worst crisis that the Church would ever endure.
GNOSTICISM
✓ “Gnosticism” comes from the Greek word “gnosis” meaning knowledge. It
refers to a heresy in the early Church that taught that salvation came from
knowledge.
✓ Gnosticism taught that secret knowledge had been given to a few. It pitted
the Demiurge, the creator god of the material world, against the remote and
unknowable Divine Being. Therefore, the material world was against and
inferior to the spiritual world.
✓ The redeemer was sent by the Divine Being to release the divine sparks, found
among some people, so that they could return to the Divine Being. This was
only possible if the individual understood the secret knowledge and practiced
the Gnostic rituals.
✓ Gnosticism rejected the Church’s teaching regarding both Christ’s human and
divine nature. It taught that Jesus did not inhabit a human body, nor did he
die on the Cross.
✓ The principle of finding the light within oneself through pagan ceremonies is
the essence of New Age religions.
MARCIONISM (144-400’S)
✓ Tradition teaches that Marcion was excommunicated by his father, a bishop,
on grounds of immorality. Going to Rome, he started his own Christian
community AD 140. This heresy grew into one of the greatest threats to
orthodox Christianity and lasted well into the fifth century.
✓ Adopting the idea from Gnosticism, he taught that the God of the Jews was
the Demiurge. He believed that Christ was sent from the God of Love, who has
no connection to the law, to bring about the destruction of the Jewish God.
✓ The dualism of Law and Love is the main thesis of his system.
2|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
✓ He only recognized the writings of St. Paul because of their teachings on the
Law. He felt the Apostles were blinded by the Jewish Law and so rejected their
writings, accepting only a purified version of St. Luke.
✓ Unwittingly, this heresy helped the Catholic Church’s development of the New
Testament Canon of Scripture.
MANICHAEISM (250s–1000s)
✓ Manichaeism was the most developed branch of Gnosticism. Founded by Mani
(AD 216-276) it taught the dualist conflict between darkness and light. The
heresy taught that Satan had stolen light particles and placed them in the
brains of humans. The goal of Manichaeism was to release this light so that it
could return to its original source.
✓ Manichaeism borrowed heavily from St. Paul, and its followers practiced strict
asceticism. It appealed to many Romans by demanding a “stricter” moral life
than Christianity, and by appealing to philosophy.
✓ St. Augustine was a fervent follower of Manichaeism for many years.
✓ Similar heresies, such as the Albigensians (Cathars) appeared in the Middle
Ages.
MONTANISM (156-200s)
✓ Montanism was an apocalyptic movement founded by Montanus based on
private revelations. He taught that a new, heavenly kingdom was about to
begin in Pepuza, a small town in Phrygia.
✓ Montanism taught that Christians who had fallen from grace could never be
forgiven or redeemed. It also placed a high emphasis on the ascetical life.
✓ Its most famous adherent was Tertullian.
DOCETISM (30s-100s)
✓ Docetism, believing that matter was corrupt, denied that Christ was truly
human or that he suffered the pain of the crucifixion. Its name comes from the
 Greek dokesis meaning appearance. It often taught that someone else
miraculously switched places with Jesus before the crucifixion.
✓ The early church was pacifist. No Christian joined them imperial armies until
170 AD
✓ Christians are expected to love their enemies and return good for evil.
✓ After the period of persecution, Christians supported the State.
I. MORAL CONCERNS OF THE EARLY CHURCH
➢ Attitude to the Material World
❖ There were some members of the Early Church who viewed the
physical world negatively.
❖ They saw the world as evil and Christ should be understood only on
the spiritual level and there should be disengagement from the world
as much as possible.
❖ Rejection of this view: affirmed the divine origin of the world and the
Incarnation of Christ.
❖ Wealth and Poverty
o Wealth as spiritually and morally dangerous, leading to the
temptation towards idolatry. Poverty was views as a situation
that Christians must respond to with sharing of material
goods.
o The early church’s economic ethic was more distributive than
productive. The early church did not think of the larger
economic system of society.
o This is seen in the unquestioning acceptance of slavery as an
essential part of economic life at that time
➢ Sexual Ethics
❖ Strict standards of sexual behavior
3|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
❖ Teachings were written mostly negative, forbidding lust, fornication,
adultery, etc.
❖ Same sex relationships were condemned
❖ Marriage while accepted was not always presented positively
➢ Violence and Political order
❖ Pacifist
❖ No Christian joined the military until 170 AD
❖ Are expected to love their enemies and return good for evil
❖ Early Christians supported the state.
II. SEMINAL THINKERS AND TRANSITIONS
➢ By the end of 2nd Cent. Christianity increasingly had to engage the larger Roman
world in dialogue. Christian thinkers sought to convince educated Romans about
the truth of the message of Christ. The result was a body of theological reflections
that combined the faith of the primitive Church with the sophistication of the
Greco-Roman world. The values, principles, and virtues of Christianity were
discussed as true and reasonable—there is an appeal to reason rather than to
authority.
➢ Clement of Alexandria
❖ On wealth- critique of inordinate attachment to wealth rather than
ownership of wealth. Wealth should not be made into idols. Rich must
help the poor.
❖ Social manners- Clement wrote on proper decorum, help Christians to
be more acceptable to sophisticated Romans.
➢ Origen
❖ This use of reason also allowed Origen to appeal to the concept of
natural law. This is the moral law promulgated by God known by
universal human reason. This natural law judges human laws and is
above man-made laws. When in conflict with human laws, natural laws
has primacy and must be obeyed.
III. 4TH CENTURY- CONSTANTINIAN TURNING POINT
❖ Basil of Caesarea, Gregory of Nyssa, Gregory of Nazianzus—
emphasized sharing with the poor, use of material goods is
stewardship of God’s poverty, rejection of usury and slavery.
❖ John Chrysostom- condemned unshared wealth while affirming
legitimacy of the government
❖ Ambrose of Milan- wrote on justice as a communitarian concept, for
the good of all; reveals a move away from pacifism, he approves of
violence only when done in the necessary defense of others, but
violent self-defense is still unacceptable.
IV. MORAL VISION OF ST. AUGUSTINE
1. Moral will
❖ All creation is an expression of God’s nature. Evil is not created by God,
it does not have an independent source outside God. Evil exist as a
movement away from the good; it is a privation of good.
❖ When we are attracted to evil we perceive it to be good. But it is lesser
good, and it becomes evil because it is a substitute for God.
❖ An evil will is a will directed away from God; it is a misdirected will.
❖ Augustine grounds Christian ethics in the moral will, not in the
goodness or evil of objects outside the will.
4|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
I. THE MAGISTERIUM (CHURCH) AS A SOURCE OF CHRISTIAN MORALITY
a) The Magisterium
➢ Presently, the magisterium is used to refer to the hierarchy (pope and
bishops) and their exercise of official teaching authority in the church.
➢ In the Catholic tradition, the magisterium is an institutionalized
authority on matters of faith and morals.
➢ The primary responsibility of the magisterium is to affirm, protect, and
promote the apostolic faith and enable all members of the Church to
assimilate the values of our Christian tradition so that these values may
be lived out creatively in the present.
➢ The magisterium has a different role in bearing the moral tradition
than that of lay persons and theologians and pastors. While other
members of the Church can repeat the official teaching of the Church,
only the magisterium can designate a certain teaching of the Church as
“the official teaching.” Only the popes and bishops can speak for the
Church. Only they can designate certain interpretations of the
apostolic faith as the official interpretations of the Church to guide
pastoral practice.
➢ Each and every pronouncement of the Pope (or lower authorities such
as Vatican offices, cardinals, bishops, monsignors working in the
Vatican) is not infallible. This means that if a statement is not infallible
it may be fallible. Fallible does not mean “false,” but it does mean that
the statement or formulation may be partial, incomplete, open to
revision, and even rejection later on (as has happened with several
Church teachings over centuries, such as the teachings on slavery,
interest taking, religious freedom, capital punishment, and so on).
➢ Level(s) of authority of Magisterial teaching based on a manner in
which it is proposed:
 o Teaching solemnly proposed de fide definita in ex cathedra
form which is an infallible, irreformable teaching.
o Conciliar teachings, which themselves have different levels of
authority (e.g., Constitution, Decree, Declaration)
o Papal Encyclicals (addressed to all people? to the whole
Church? to a particular area or group?)
o Papal Apostolic Exhortations (especially following the Synod of
Bishops)
o Apostolic Constitutions (e.g., establishment of a particular
celebration, such as the Holy Year, or which address various
matters, such as penitential practices, the reform of the curia,
etc.)
o Apostolic Letters given “motu proprio” (e.g., a personal letter
written by a pope either to the whole church, a local church, or
some particular group or body; or used to issue norms,
establish a new institute, restructure various situations, etc.)
o Occasional papal allocutions (e.g., from a congress, etc.;
Wednesday audience)
b) Remarks on the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility (Given in 1870 in Pastor
Aeternus, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ, Vatican I [DS 3074-
3075]).
➢ “It is a divinely revealed dogma that the Roman Pontiff, when he
speaks ex cathedra, that is, when, acting in the office of shepherd and
teacher of all Christians, he defines, by virtue of his supreme apostolic
authority, a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held [tenenda]
by the universal Church, possesses through the divine assistance
promised to him in the person of Blessed Peter, the infallibility with
which the divine Redeemer wiled his Church to be endowed in defining
the doctrine concerning faith or morals; and that such definitions of
the Roman Pontiff are therefore irreformable of themselves, not
5|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
because of the consent of the Church (ex sese, non autem ex consensu
ecclesiae). But if anyone presumes to contradict this our definition—
which God forbid—anathema sit.”
➢ The definition does not say even that an ex cathedra statement will be
fully and completely true from an objective perspective, but rather
such statements would contain the level of certainty “which the divine
Redeemer wiled his Church to be endowed in defining the doctrine
concerning faith or morals.” Thus, an important related question is to
what extent Jesus wills moral certainty in such pronouncements (e.g.,
does Jesus will that a potential statement on the morality of interest-
taking [usury] remain absolutely true in every detail for each and every
economic situation throughout all of human history).
➢ “Faith and morals” is one possible English translation of the Latin
original, de fide vel moribus. However, it is difficult to translate the
term moribus [mores] since it could legitimately mean “customs” in
the sense of the English cognate “mores.”
➢ To date no such infallible moral pronouncement has been made.
c) Religious Assent
➢ A Catholic is required to give religious assent to the teaching of the
magisterium (Lumen Gentium 25). Religious assent means a
submission of the will and the mind to the authentic teaching
authority of the pope. What does this mean?
o A Catholic must make a serious effort to come to an
intellectual agreement that a teaching taught by the
magisterium is the truth.
o One should strive to personally appropriate the teaching and
live by it.
 o The basis for this submission is a religious reason—one’s
efforts at submitting to the magisterium are motivated by the
conviction that Jesus has commissioned the Church to be
moral guide for the faithful and that the holy Spirit assists it in
discerning moral truth.
o One must avoid two extremes:
▪ To automatically consider the magisterium as always
right without any critical reflection.
▪ To consider the teaching of the magisterium as only as
good as its arguments or treating the magisterium as
just one theological opinion among others.
o Middle ground: one maintains an initial presumption in favour
of the magisterium while remaining open to setting aside this
presumption id serious evidence warrants it in a conflict
situation.
▪ This means that the magisterium is a primary factor in
the discernment and decision making of the
conscience but it may not be the exclusive basis of
one’s decision and there may be cases when it may not
be ultimate decisive factor.
▪ We must use prudence in determining whether the
presumption in favour of the magisterium prevails in a
situation of conflict.
▪ The primacy of conscience continues to be affirmed.
➢ Responsible dissent follows when the only remaining reason left for
d) Criteria for Responsible Dissent
➢ Responsible dissent distinguishes between the degrees of authority of
different teachings.
o Important distinction:
6|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
▪ Teachings which deal with the core of faith are
proposed definitely as non-reformable matter of
divine revelation;
▪ Teachings which are more removed from the core of
faith and are proposed authoritatively but are
reformable (non-infallible).
o Dissent from teachings which express the core of faith places
one outside of the communion of the Church (ex-
communication). Responsible dissent from non-infallible,
reformable teaching is part of the normal process of
developing moral teachings.
o Not all non-infallible moral teachings have the same weight
with regard to dissent. General moral principles have more
weight than concrete moral applications to specific cases.
Concrete applications of general principles are open to many
variations and may depend on the pastoral circumstances.
One can disagree over specific applications but agree with the
Church on general principles. We must distinguish general
principles from specific applications.
o The weight of a teaching is relative to the kind of document in
which it appears and to the level of magisterial source from
which it comes. The greater the degree of authority, the
stronger the presumption of truth which it carries, and the
more serious the reasons one needs to dissent.
holding a position is that it is being taught by the magisterium, though
not adequately supported by convincing reasons.
o The point of this criterion is that, after a duly competent
person has examined the evidence and the arguments and
found certain aspects of the teaching wanting, such a person
 would not be inclined to accept the teaching except for the
fact that the magisterium holds it to be true.
o To apply this criterion, one must first take account of the
episcopal and papal authority behind the teaching. One must
recognize that the magisterial teaching has a higher status
than just one more theological opinion among others.
o If one were to express doubt about a magisterial teaching,
this doubt must be supported by the opinion of a considerable
number of experts in the field. This assures that the dissent is
not simply based on the eccentricities of one person.
➢ Responsible dissent is proportionate to the competence of the person
make an assessment of the teaching at stake.
o Need to distinguish between various levels of dissent:
internal—private—public organized dissent. The further one
moves from internal to public organized dissent the greater
the competence required.
o Internal dissent comes when someone, in spite of sincere
efforts to give assent, is unable to accept the teaching. In
internal dissent, the dissenter keeps his/her disagreement to
himself.
o Private dissent is an external expression of internal dissent to
a very private audience. Greater competence is needed to
move from internal dissent to overt expressions of private
dissent. Internal and private dissents are fairly tolerated in the
church.
o Public dissent refers to open disagreement with official church
teaching. It is communicated publicly to the mass media, and
through popular and professional journals. The crucial issue of
public dissent is the manner of expressing it.
o Organized scholarly dissent is different from organized
popular dissent. In organized scholarly dissent, scholars may
7|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
convene a professional conference in order to examine a
teaching and to propose a critical response to the magisterium
for the purpose of further refining or possibly revising the
teaching. This form of dissent continues to respect the special
status of the magisterium.
o Organized popular dissent is an effort to influence public
opinion toward an alternative position. In its extreme form,
organized popular dissent actively promotes its own
judgements as an alternative pastoral norm which can replace
the official teaching of the Church. The danger here is that this
form of dissent usurps the role of the official magisterium by
setting up a rival magisterium. The magisterium cannot
tolerate this form of dissent in the same way that it can
tolerate other forms of dissent.
e) Guidelines for Dissent
➢ Affirm the teaching authority of the Church
➢ Be concerned about the means
o Be aware of the danger of scandal (leading others to an
occasion of sin or weakening of their faith)
o Use prudent expressions of dissent
o Show deference and respect toward the teaching authority of
the Church even when in disagreement.
➢ Contribute toward the reformulation of the teaching
o The aim of dissent is to convince the magisterium that the
present formulation of the teaching is inadequate or
erroneous.
➢ Count the cost
o The one who dissents should be willing to pay the price which
may come with the dissent.
 Responsible dissent is not destructive disobedience. It could be a service to the
Church if it leads to a more adequate or truthful teaching. Responsible dissent in the
Church rests upon the conviction that the achievement of truth in the Church is a
process in which all have a responsibility.
II. NATURAL LAW AS A SOURCE OF CHRISTIAN MORALITY
a) Natural Law
➢ The Natural Law approach to ethics has the fundamental belief that God
created an ordered universe with a specific purpose.
➢ God created human beings with enough intelligence that they can use
their reason to observe the natural world and make reliable judgements
about God’s purpose and how human behaviour may cooperate with
god’s plan.
➢ There is an objective moral order that is accessible to all who use their
reason.
b) Contribution of Natural Law to Catholic morality
➢ Natural Law claims the existence of an objective moral order. Natural law
theory is a good resource to fight against ethical relativism which does not
believe that there is objective right and wrong in the universe. Natural law
guides us through general principles for the proper course of action.
➢ Natural law morality is accessible to anyone independently of one’s
religion. Since one only needs to use one’s reason to grasp the order God
has planned in nature, catholic tradition can argue for the morality of
particular actions without having to appeal to religious insight or
motivation. This allows the Church to participate in ecumenical discussions
with non-Catholics, non-Christians, and non-religious persons.
➢ The knowledge of the natural law can be universalized. The natural law
allows the Church to appeal to all people of goodwill and rally support
worldwide for certain moral issues.
8|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
c) There are two strands of interpretation in the natural law tradition:
➢ The order of nature: focused on the physical and biological structures
given in nature as the source of morality. The order of nature
interpretation of natural law suggests a blueprint or maker’s
instructions theory of natural law. It takes a physicalist approach to
the formation of moral teachings. It is natural fundamentalism which
makes the law of God and the rule of nature one. This interpretation
has dominated Catholic moral tradition in sexual and medical matters
pertaining to reproduction.
➢ The order of reason: focused on the human capacity to discover in
experience what befits human well-being. In the order of reason,
nature includes the total complexity of human reality taken in all its
relationships and with all its potentials. Nature is constantly changing;
it continues to make new demands on us. As a result, change, revision,
and development would be constitutive of natural moral law. What
pertains to nature is accessible to all and provides the potential with
which human creativity must deal in order to achieve human
wholeness. It takes a personlist approach to formulating moral
teachings. The order of reason approach is more visible in Catholic
social teaching.
III. EXPERIENCE AS A SOURCE OF CHRISTIAN MORALITY
a) Development of Doctrine
➢ Examples of Development of Doctrine:
i. Adultery and Bigamy
• Adultery is a serious sin established by the Mosaic Law
and confirmed directly by the Lord (Ex 20:14; Mt 5:27-
28). Bigamy is a variant of adultery where the sin is
 treated as compounded by taking an institutional form.
But adultery and bigamy cannot occur unless there is
an existing marriage that is violated. Today, any non-
sacramental union may be dissolved under the given
circumstances by one of the parties who converts and
may be dissolved under the papal authority in aid of
the faith of a third party—a Catholic living in adultery
with one of the partners to the original marriage.
• Pauline Privilege: Paul is dealing with a marriage that
could have been between Jews and Greeks where the
nonconvert leaves the convert after conversion. He
declares, “Neither a brother or a sister is a slave in such
matters,” so a Jewish wife, converted to Christianity is
no longer bound if her husband leaves her (1 Cor 7:12-
16).
• Missionaries encountered two relevant situations:
Indian chiefs who were polygamists but ready to
convert if not compelled to keep their first wife, and
African slaves, brought to the Americas without their
spouses and ready to be good converts if they remarry.
Pope Pius V in 1567 issued Romani pontificis declaring
valid and lawful the union of the Indian with the wife
he was baptized with. In 1585, in response to Jesuit
missionaries, Pope Gregory XIII issued Populis et
nationibus asserting the papal power of dissolving the
marriage of unbelievers “if necessity urges.”
• Petrine Privilege: the papal power was used by Pope
John XXIII in a case from Djakarta in 1959: Lo Ma, an
unbaptized Chinese woman, was married in China to
Phan, also unbaptized. Phan left her and came to
Indonesia. When the Japanese invasion occurred,
Dorothy, a baptized Catholic, like other Indonesian girls
9|C ONTEMPORARY MORAL T HEOLOGY 116 (SH S)
saw marriage as an urgent necessity. She married
Phan. Two years later she discovered the existence of
his first wife, Lo Ma. Now Dorothy was mired in
adultery. She could not receive the sacraments. Phan
had no desire to convert so the Pauline Privilege was
no use. Dorothy’s case being presented to the Pope,
John XXIII dissolved the marriage of Phan and Lo Ma in
favour of the faith of Dorothy.
ii. Usury
• A scriptural basis did exist in strong injunctions
against Jews taking usury of Jews (Ps 14:5; Ex 22, 25;
Lev. 25:35-37; Ez 18:5-9; cf. Lk 6:35).
• The 2nd (1139) and the 3rd (1179) Lateran Councils
prohibited usury and declared it a sin.
• Urban III in 1186 cited the words of Christ: “Lend
freely, hoping nothing thereby” (Lk 6:35) and
interpreted them as a commandment.
• Contentions: to permit interest understood as
compensation to the lender for profit the lender
could have realized in lawful investments; some
argued that the risk inherent in lending was in itself a
ground for taking interest; concept of gratuitous
loan contract was challenged. Still, a series of papal
bulls rejected the innovation.
• In the 19th century, the prohibition as it had been
framed in the 12th century was dead. The experience
that contributed to its burial was the experience of
commerce in Europe, the experience of
businessmen, the experience of bankers. The old
prohibition, presented rooted in natural law, was
found to be out of touch with economic reality. The
 customs of the market and of public finance
prevailed.
iii. Death Penalty
• Capital punishment was an institution of Roman law
that the early Christians accepted as an ordinary
mechanism of civil society.
• Occasionally, Christians taught that all killing was
wrong. Ambrose rebuked the official authors of
particular public executions or recommended mercy
in particular cases. But there was no established,
coherent, fundamental opposition to the institution
that developed.
• The medieval church got more deeply into its
support as death became the punishment for
heretics.
• In the recent centuries, in reaction to the slaughter
of World War II most of the European countries got
rid of the institution. The church began to catch up
with the governments.
• In 1995 Pope John Paul II issued the encyclical
Evangelium vitae and taught that instances where the
defense of society could only be accomplished by the
death penalty were “very rare, if in fact they occur at
all”. Now the Church is very strong in their
condemnation of Capital Punishment.
iv. Slavery
• Slavery was an institution uncriticised in the Hebrew
bible and a fixed institution of the Roman world in
which Christianity appeared. Without questioning the
10 | C O N T E M P O R A R Y M O R A L T H E O L O G Y 1 1 6 ( S H S )
legal structure, Paul instructed the slaves of Corinth
to obey their masters (1 Cor 7:21; cf. Phlm 11-19).
• Augustine: “Christ freed men from sin but did not
make men free from being slaves” (On Psalms 125, 7,
PL 37, 1653).
• Bede: it was Gregory the Great’s browsing in the
slave market of Rome that led the pope to decide to
send missionaries to England (Historia ecclestiastica
gentis anglorum, ed G.H. Moberley, 2, 1.). That day
enlightened the pope on the possibility of
evangelizing the English; it did not move him to
denounce the trade that sent them as slaves to
Rome.
• It was only in 1839 that Gregory XVI condemned the
slave trade, yet not so comprehensively that the
American bishops understood the condemnation to
apply in the United States. As late as 1866 the Holy
Office ruled that the buying and selling of slaves was
contrary to natural law.
• It was only as part of a general European revulsion
against slave trading in Africa that Leo XIII issued an
unequivocal moral condemnation of human bondage
[Catholicae ecclesiae, 20 Nov 1890, Acta sanctae sedis,
23, 257 (1890)].
• John Paul II: slavery as an instance of the intrinsically
evil, as a violation of a universally valid negative
precept, as a departure from an obligation binding
“each and every individual, always, and in every
circumstance” [Veritatis Splendor (6 Aug 1993), Acta
apostolicae sedis 85, 1198].
 ➢ Questions:
i. Did it surprise you that some of the teachings of the church
have developed?
ii. Did it challenge any prevailing notion of the stability and
consistency of the church’s moral teaching?
iii. Did it affect the way you perceive the Church as a moral
authority?
iv. Are you comfortable with the idea that teaching of the
church can change through time?
v. What would your reaction be if there is a proposal to
change a teaching of the church which has been held for a
long time—e.g. contraception, homosexual marriage,
women’s ordination?
➢ Development of doctrine are not random changes in church teaching
or relativism. It is growth in the Church’s insight into Christ; we grow in
understanding what it means to imitate Christ in our life as a Church.
➢ The consistency we seek is not a consistency of formulas or verbal
expressions. The consistency that we seek to maintain is consistency
with Christ—we follow where Christ leads us—toward greater
understanding of our humanity, our relationship with others, with our
relationship with God.
➢ There is nothing to fear if we trust that the Spirit of Christ guides the
Church
➢ Is change good? Yes, if the principle of change is Christ.
➢ By fostering empathy among the rulemakers for those who are
affected can we help initiate development in moral teachings.
➢ For the rulemakers: Do not dismiss the experiences of those who
cannot follow the rules. Place yourself in their shoes and understand
their experience and difficulties.
That in all things God may be glorified.
***********************************************************
Sources / References:
J. Philip Wogaman, Christian Ethics (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John
Knox Press, 1993) pp. 3-15.
Richard Gula, Reason Informed by Faith, ch 12, 165-172.
John T. Noonan, Jr., “Experience and the Development of Moral
Doctrine,” in CTSA Proceedings 54,
43-56.
John T. Noonan, Jr., “Development in Moral Doctrine,” Theological
Studies 54 (1993), 676-677.

b) How can we participate in the development of teachings?

➢ Two levels of experiences:
i. The experience of those affected by the rules
ii. The experience of those who make the rules
➢ We need to make the rulemakers understand the experience of those
affected by the rules. The experience of the affected should be
translated to the experience of the rulemakers.

11 | C O N T E M P O R A R Y M O R A L T H E O L O G Y 1 1 6 ( S H S )