God Created all things… “paradise”
(Ephesians 2:20 ) .
There was harmony, justice, peace, and
joy.
The first human beings (“Adam” and
“Eve”) still committed sin
Sacrament: means channel,
representative, visible sign of an
invisible reality.
God - Jesus - Church
The Sacrament of God is
Jesus and the Sacrament of Jesus is
the Church (John 20:21, Acts 1:8)
The Church started as a religious
renewal “movement”/group in
Jerusalem, Israel by no other than
Jesus Christ. Jesus grounded the
Church on the foundation of the
Apostles and it spread from Jerusalem
to the Roman Empire world until
throughout all the earth.
The first “name” of the Church was
The Way (Acts 9:2), The members of
the Church were called Christians in
Antioch (Acts 11: 26). The Church
was persecuted by the Roman Empire
(which was still pagan) until the
Conversion of the Emperor Constantine
in 313 AD which paved the way for
Christians to infiltrate Rome until
Christianity was declared as the official
religion of the Roman Empire in 380 AD
by Emperor Theodosius.
Way back in 45 AD, the first apostle
who went to Rome and started the
Church there was no other than Peter.
Later, reflecting on the mission of Jesus
which He passed on to the Church, the
Church’s official “name” or title evolved
into: One (John 17:21), Holy
(Ephesians 1:4, 5:27, I Peter 2:9),
Catholic (Matthew 28: 18-20, Acts 1:8,
Gen 12: 3, John 3: 16-17) and Apostolic
From the Church developed the
Hierarchy (Bishops, priests, and
deacons – with the Pope as the overall
head for the sake of division of work
and maintaining the unity of the
Church while it spreads the Kingdom of
God on earth.
From the Church comes the
different “kinds” of priests according to
spirituality or mission area.
a. Diocesan is a term use for priests
serving their local places;
b. Monks: started in the 3rd century AD
in Egypt and in Syria with a life of
simplicity or asceticism.
Monks who are composed of
sisters (not priests) only came out later.
Example of few monks in Cagayan who
are sisters are those at the St. Claire
monastery in Iguig.
c. Missionaries are group/community of
priests who really want to go to serve
remote places not yet evangelize.
Examples of missionaries are
the following:
c.1. The Dominicans who was founded
by St. Dominic in Prouille, France in
1216. (Dominic was a Spanish priest).
c.2. The Augustinians which started in
1244 in Italy (group or no specific
founder).
c.3. The Jesuits or called Society of
Jesus who was founded in 1540 by
Ignatius of Loyola, formerly a Spanish
soldier who became priest.
c.4. The CICM and other missionary
groups only came out later.
 The CICM was founded by a
diocesan priest Theophile Verbist in
1862 in Scheut, Anderlecht, Brussels,
Belgium.
So what is a CICM? It is just one of the
missionary groups which is an arm of
the Church for evangelization.
One of the many strategies for
missionaries to evangelize people
especially the youth to prepare them to
become also evangelizers in their own
ways in the future is to establish
schools. With this, obviously, in the
missionary schools and even schools
established by the local Church, the
core of the curriculum is the Christian
Faith Education of the young (children
to college); in a wider sense, the
Christian formation of the Community
who are running the school. The CICM
established schools for such purpose.
Here at the University of Saint Louis,
our motto for us to always remember
this is “Mission and Excellence” and
among the core values of our
University’s Vision – Mission, the first is
Christian Living.
a. Christian Living. We are witnesses to
the Gospel values as taught and lived
by Christ thus making
God’s love known and experienced by
all.
b. Excellence. We seek and maintain
uncompromising standard of quality in
teaching, learning, service, and
stewardship of school resources.
c. Professional Responsibility. We are
committed to efficiently and responsibly
apply the learned principles, values and
skills in the chosen field of discipline,
taking initiative and command
responsibility in one’s professional
advancement.
d. Social Awareness and Involvement.
We engage ourselves with society by
listening to the prevailing issues and
concerns in the society, thereby
initiating and participating in
constructive and relevant social
activities for the promotion of justice,
peace and integrity of creation and for
people’s wellness and development
consistent with the CICM charism.
e. Innovation, Creativity and Agility. We
keep ourselves relevant and responsive
to the changing needs of our
stakeholders by being flexible, solution
oriented, and having cutting-edge
decisions and practices.
What is Morality?
The Descriptive title of our course is
Christian Morality in Our Times. First,
we have to ask what is Morality?
Basically, Morality is connected with
norms. So, the next step is to ask if
what is a norm?
What is Norms?
It is commonly defined as rules or
standards that are socially enforced. In
the ancient times, norms often come in
the forms of customs, rituals, and
traditions. This was so since people
would easily follow these standards if it
becomes part of their life-styles until it
becomes part of their way of living.
Morality deals with the “quality”
(goodness or badness) of human
acts/actions. In morality we judge
whether a certain act or action is
good or bad. How does morality judge
human acts/actions? Morality needs
basis/bases which are the rules or
standards or technically called Law. In
general, these rules or standards or
laws are called Norms.
Source of Norms
Three Bases in coming up with a
good/right norm for human act/
human life: Knowing the Origin, Nature
and the End/Destiny of the human
person.
The concepts of the Origin, Nature, and
the Destiny of the Human Person and
their serious implications in coming up
with moral norms.
1. The Concept of the Origin of the
Human Person and all things that
surround him/her.
Origin: God – man is Creature of God
Apes- man came from apes
Serious Implications to Morality:
If you believe that the human person
originated from a supreme being called
“God”, then it follows that your moral
norms/laws will depend on the
characteristics of that “God”; or that
“God” will be the one to command or
give norms to the human person. An
example of this is the
Commandments in the case of Judaism
or Christianity. The moral laws will
greatly respect the dignity of that “God”
and the human person whom He also
created. There is what you call “fear of
the Lord” as part of your moral norms.
2. Human Nature / Natural law (since
man is part of the whole nature or
Creation)
One’s concept/view of the nature of
the human person will also dictate
what set of moral norms is being set
to be followed or lived by us humans.
Serious Implications to Morality:
As being explained above in the
concept of the origin of all things, if
you believe that we are both bodily
and spiritual beings since we are
creations of God, then our moral
norms will flow from such concept,
and if you just believe that we are
purely animals, then our moral
norms will also flow from such view
like treating us as purely animals.
3. Destiny / End / or the Ultimate
Goal of human life
Different religions commonly believe
that as we were created by a higher
being or called supreme being, we also
have a good destiny prepared for us. We
commonly believe that there is a life
after the death of our physical aspect.
This is called “heaven” in Christianity,
and other religions have also their own
terms for such a destiny for the human
person.
On the other way around, other
people who do not believe in beings that
are higher than the human person will
10
just say that there is no such thing as
life after death. Death is the ultimate
end of the human persons.
Serious Implications to Morality:
The same with the case of the
concept of the origin of all, the view for
the end/destiny of the human person
will also dictate what set of moral
norms is being laid for us. If you
strongly believe in the life after death
and going there at the end of life
requires good moral life, then we have
to do good in our lives to be able to
attained such destiny. On the other
hand, if there is no noble
end/destiny for the human person,
then there are no such thing as
moral norms. There will be norms but
they will greatly depend on the concept
of the people who can manipulate the
others
What is Morality?
The Descriptive title of our course is
Christian Morality in Our Times. First,
we have to ask what is Morality?
Basically, Morality is connected with
norms. So, the next step is to ask if
what is a norm?
Norm is a fundamental concept in
the social sciences. It is commonly
defined as rules or standards that are
socially enforced. In the ancient times,
when there were no formal social
structures such as government and the
Church; or when the different religions
were not yet as organized as they are
now, norms often come in the forms of
customs, rituals, and traditions. This
was so since people would easily follow
these standards if it becomes part of
their life-styles until it becomes part of
their way of living. In the Philippine
context, respecting one’s parents would
be taught by saying “po” or “opo” to
them, or by the practice of
“pagmamano”.
Norms would only come in the forms of
rules, regulations, or technically called
law when society became more socially
organized in their government systems.
When different societies mature or
develop, their moral standards would
also become more organized, more so
when they realized how important is the
laying out of the rules to govern human
actions for the sustenance of the peace
and order in society which will pave the
way for more social progress and
further developments. So, what is
“Morality” in a more technical
definition?
Our next question is, how did morality
arrive with these norms? If the human
person came up with these norms or
found these norms by thinking deeply/
reflecting or so, called philosophizing,
then the process or the science is called
Moral Philosophy. In other situations, if
the norms or rules were given or
revealed by God or the Divine being, the
science is called Moral Theology.
What is the difference between the
two?
Moral Philosophy found out the norms
or rules by using purely human
reasoning or called philosophizing,
while in Moral Theology, these rules or
norms were given or revealed by God.
An example of norms in Moral Theology
is the Ten Commandments. So Moral
Philosophy relies on pure
reasoning/deeply thinking while Moral
Theology would depend on God’s
revelation and faith. Aside from
Philosophizing and God’s revelation, let
us try to find out how others come up
with norms for the human person
Most if not all religions would strongly
believe that all creation and the human
person came from a creator which we
call “God” whether you call that God
YHWH, Allah, Brahman, Bathala,
Kabuniyan or what so ever term which
would indicate being all-powerful and
other traits expected of a supreme
being.
Outside the realm of beliefs,
some would strongly propose other
theories for the origin of the human
person such as the theories that the
human person evolved from other
creatures or animals or even product of
purely natural happenings.
For the second concept of the origin of
the human person which suggests that
we evolved from other animals or just
product of purely natural events, its
moral norms will just depend on the
nature of the human person which will
just be purely animal. With this, there
will be no higher dignity for the person
to be respected and there will also be
no fear or respect for a higher being or
higher authority which is called “God”.
So, you can just do whatever you want
such as easily manipulating others
even to the point of killing
fellow human persons since you may
think that man is the highest authority
on earth.
: Moral Philosophy studies the goodness
and badness of human actions in the
light of the highest principles based on
human reason alone while Moral
Theology studies the goodness and
badness of human actions in the light
of revelation (in the light of Christian
faith to attain his final goal).
HUMAN NATURE/THE HUMAN
PERSON
Who or what is the Human person
based on Nature?
Since the actions of the human person
flows from what he/she is, we need to
discuss his/her nature by enumerating
its essential characteristics.
1. Rational being - has
intellect/mind/reason.; the only animal
who knows that she/he knows.
2. Has Free-will. - the power to act or
not to act on his/her choices.
3. Has Conscience. – the practical
judgment of the intellect on what is
good or what is bad, and is
prompting the person to always
do/follow what is good.
4. Loving being – Aside from the love
between opposite sex which is designed
for the continuity of the human species,
generally, loving means desiring the
good of others.
5. Body - Person – We have a flesh
(physical part), which connects us to
the material world. Our bodies (physical
part) is dependent on nature/earth.
Our bodies use the elements of the
earth. The death of mother earth will
also be the death of our bodies.
6. Sexual – refers to being male or
female which is intended for
companionship and pro-creation.
7. Unique Though Social: - We need
independence but we are also social
being who live with others. These two
are inseparable. No wo/man is an
island
8. Historical: We have a continuity
with the past.
9. Transcendental: the human person
has Metaphysical (meta = beyond)
aspects such as intellect, emotion,
conscience and others.
What is the Implication of the
Human Nature to Morality?
Our actions flow from our nature. As
historical beings, you must learn from
your past experiences; as a loving
being, you must always desire what is
good for others; as a rational being,
you think before you act; as
transcendental being, you are heading
to a certain destiny, and the like.
Among these traits of the nature of
the human person, which should
regulate the others and his/her
human actions/decisions?
The one which should always regulate
the others or human actions which
proceed from the other traits is
Conscience. This is because using the
other traits like intellect or freewill
alone without the intervention of
Conscience can lead to misuse, or
abuse of human actions.
Since we are Christians who strongly
believe in the existence of a Creator
(Theos or God) as the origin of all and
the proper destiny which this Creator
prepared for us, we also need to look at
the other traits of the human person
based on this perspective.
Who/What is the human person in a
Theological Perspective/View?
1. Masterpiece of God (God’s Image
and likeness): We reflect some of the
important characteristics of God such
as goodness, loving, just,
compassionate and many others. So, if
God is good, then basically we are also
good; if God is just, we are also
basically just, and others.
2. Fundamentally/innately good or
moral being: No human person is bad
or evil, only our wrong actions are bad
or evil and not the human person.
3. God’s partner / “co-creators” of
God. This is why we are called stewards
of God’s creation. Part of our being “co-
creators” of God is our being sexual
(male or female) which is design for
pro-creation.
4. Rational being– has intellect or
reasoning or mind.
5. Free – will – has freedom and will
which he/she can use to act or not to
act.
6. Brother’s keeper (social, and
communal): we need to take care of
others aside from ourselves.
7. Weak / has fallen nature/
“brokenness”: This is called original
sin in Theology. In other terms we may
call this being “incomplete”, or
“unfinished”. From this being
incomplete comes your mission which
is to finish or complete yourselves.
8. Graced: this means we are
aided/being assisted by God in our
journey of bringing ourselves to
perfection. In the Catholic Church,
God’s grace will come to us through the
Seven Sacraments and our other ways
of connecting with our Creator.
9. Transcendental: this pushes us to
look for the ultimate meaning of life and
ultimately to our God
10. Children/family of God. We belong
to the family of God, formally through
Baptism.
11. Destined for the Kingdom. We
have our destiny which we commonly
call “heaven” or “paradise” or in Jesus’
words called the Kingdom of God.
Why do we need to formulate
norms/rules/laws for the human
person if his/her nature should
influence his/her actions? Well, there
are many people who abuse their other
faculties like mind/intellect,
freedom and others, and they also
ignore the very basic and immediate
norm which is Conscience. This is why
there are many norms or set of norms
laid for the good of the human person
and one of the very basic set of norms
is the Ten Commandments.
With this, we hope that the sources of
the norms of Morality is now very clear
to us. For a kind of widening of horizon,
let us look on the other views on the
destiny for the human person since we
also said earlier that the concept of the
destiny is also one of the sources of the
norms of morality.
Some views on the Ultimate
End/Destiny of the Human Person
a. Hedonism
For this Philosophy, the
ultimate goal for the human person is
Happiness, and this happiness is found
in pleasure (“sarap)”. So, “kung saan
ang masarap’ dun ang kasiyahan”. This
pleasure is sensual.
Therefore, for this certain
philosophy, the norm for human action
is to look for pleasure/pleasurable
things.
b. Marxism: A philosophy by Karl Marx
which looks at the human person as
purely material being or from mater
and there are no such things as
metaphysical aspects such as soul and
also God. This view just focused on the
way of governance since it was more of
a reaction to the abuses of the
democratic and other forms of
governing people.
For Marxism, the ultimate goal
of people is to have a Classless Society
(no rich, no poor). This was achieved in
a communistic form of government.
Development or progress must always
be for the common good / not
individualistic.
Norm: Do everything for the
common good. Never mind individual
goals or individual progress, set aside
yourselves. “all for one, one for all”.
c. Nihilism:
For this philosophy, the human
person and his/her life has no ultimate
meaning, no ultimate value.
If the human person and life is
meaningless or no value at all, what is
your norm for life and for your action?
Aside from having no definite norm, you
reflect on the danger of this kind of
philosophy.
d. Christian view:
For Christianity, the ultimate
goal/destiny for the human person is to
enter the Kingdom or to have eternal
union/happiness with God.
Norm: Follow the teachings of
God such as the Ten Commandments
and others.
a. Morality is a matter of opinion. This
means that moral norms are subjective;
depends on the person.
b. All opinions about morality are equal
and correct. Therefore, all opinions
should be followed.
c. Morality is outside the world of
practical people. Whatever impractical
is not good.
d. Morality develops guilt and moral
obligation which makes life unhappy.
So, we need to set aside moral norms
Point for reflection: What are the
possible or even probable things that
will happen to people and to society if
all these wrong principles about
morality are correct?
After discussing all the sources
of norms for the human person and
their serious implications if there are
misconceptions, our next question is,
what should we really judge as good or
bad? Is it the human person or his/her
qualities or traits or his/her actions?
Reflect on this for our discussion next
meeting.
BASIC CONCEPTS IN MORALITY
What is Morality?
• an encompassing concept that
serves as the underlying force for
every action of an individual and
of a society
• takes the crucial role of
formulating, establishing and
setting ethical norms of conduct
that govern behaviors and
actions of an individual or group
of individuals in order to achieve
harmony, unity, and order within
a society.
Purposes of Morality:
a. For the Fullness of Freedom -
for the human person to be
totally free
God willed that man/woman should be
‘left in the hand of his/her own counsel’
so that she/he will, of his/her own
accord, seek his/her Creator and freely
attain his/her full blessed perfection.
Man/Woman is “rational and, therefore,
like God; he/she is created with free
will and is master over his/her acts.”
So, norms are not prohibitions or
imprisonment for the human person
but are guide for him/her to be totally
free.
To clarify this, what will happen to you
if you do whatever you want? This is
the youngs’ perception of freedom. If I
will do whatever I want, like I will just
steal others’ property or even kill
someone, what will happen to me? It is
either I will end up in the prison cell or
I will go hiding. Doing whatever I want
will make me unfree. So, freedom does
not mean I will do whatever I want, but
I will always do anything so long as it is
good for me and for others. Freedom is
aimed at the perfection of the human
person.
B. A guide to the Fullness of Human
Development
Moral development is part of human
development. Moral development is the
process through which children develop
proper attitudes and behaviors toward
other people in society, based on social
and cultural norms, rules, and laws.
Moral development is a concern for
every parent. Teaching a child to
distinguish right from wrong and to
behave accordingly is a goal of
parenting.
Moral development is a complex issue
that—since the beginning of human
civilization—has been a topic of
discussion among some of the world's
most distinguished psychologists,
theologians, and culture theorists.
Material progress which does not follow
moral norms and which others still
consider as development is not really
so. Examples of this are the jets
fighters, bombs, and others. These are
not really developments but are aimed
for destruction; destruction of human
lives or destruction of things, and
nature.
So, developments whether scientific,
social, economic and others should
always follow norms of morality or else,
they are aimed for destruction of many
things as mentioned above
C. A Guide towards Reality (truth of
things, life)
Morality is a guide for the human
person to discover reality or the truth of
things, and of life. This will lead the
human person to discover the hierarchy
of values until the ultimate value of life
and of all things. So, this will help the
human person to set his/her priorities
in life until her/his attainment of the
ultimate goal which is the eternal union
and happiness with his/her Creator.
D. A Guide towards Meaning of
Life
As mentioned above, morality or always
doing good will allow the human person
to discover the real value of things and
life which at the end will let him/her
experience the true meaning of life.
E. The Entrance of Eternal Life into
the Life of the Human Person
After following the moral norms,
discovering the truth and real value of
all things, and bringing himself/herself
to perfection, the human person will be
able to reach his/her final destiny
which is to enter the kingdom of God.
Morality reveals and leads the human
person to his/her ultimate end/destiny.
After finding out the Purposes of
Morality, let us go back to the causes
why there is morality. Although, these
were implied in the discussions above,
we will enumerate and briefly explain
them for clarification purpose.
MORALITY PRESUPPOSES the
following:
1. The existence of God
Morality points us to the existence of
the Creator of all things who is totally
good and perfect and whom we call
“God”. Since this Creator is totally good
or perfect, He/She also gave us a guide
to attain total goodness or perfection.
2. Intellect and Free Will
Intellect, freedom, will, and passions
needs moral norms so for them not to
be abused, misuse or overuse.
3. Ultimate Destiny
As discussed above, moral norms are
guides for the human person to attain
his/her ultimate destiny which is the
Kingdom of God or eternal happiness
with God.
4. Accountability to an Ultimate
value
Morality tells us that there are ultimate
values or ends that we will be
accountable (responsible) or we will face
the consequence later if we do not
follow the norms. This ultimate value is
our final destiny which is the Kingdom
of God.
Object of Morality
It is the action of the human person. To
be very specific, what kind of action
needs to be judge as good or bad? There
are two kinds of acts which are the so-
called human acts and acts of man.
Which of these two should be
moralized? While human acts and acts
of man both pertain to the actions or
behaviors of an individual or group of
individuals, they must be clearly
delineated in order to discern which
brings moral responsibility.
Human Acts are actions that are
proper to humans, thus the crucial
element of willful consent and
knowledge of the action must be
present. One must freely use his/her
intellect and freewill when acting.
Human acts reveal the value of
responsibility or accountability. Eating
healthy foods, reading notes in
preparation for an exam, and saying no
to drugs are just few examples.
Acts of Man are the actions that do not
reflect the person as a rational being.
The actions are performed without
conscious deliberation or knowledge
and with the absence of freewill. Acts of
man constitute unconscious and
involuntary actions. Examples are one’s
way of sleeping, suddenly catching a
falling object, one’s way of walking,
reacting instinctively when touching a
very hot surface, and the likes. These
are done without the use of freewill and
reason. Some of these just happen
naturally as automatic responses to the
HUMAN ACTS ACTS OF MAN
Deliberate Indeliberate
Free Not free
Voluntary Involuntary
Conscious “Unconscious”
Willful Unwillful
Known “Unknown”
Aware “Unaware”
situations.
Constituents of Human Acts
1. Human acts are known and
deliberate. An individual, as the moral
agent, has full knowledge in doing a
certain action. There is a prior
knowledge and a deliberate evaluation
whether to do an action or not.
2. Human acts are free. An individual
as the moral agent is free from any
external factors as well as internal
pressure to do the act. He/She is
neither forced nor intimidated to do or
not to do something.
3. Human acts are voluntary. The
action proceeds from the willingness of
an individual to perform action with a
perceived knowledge of the end.
With the given distinction above, it is
now very clear that we cannot moralize
acts of man but the Human Acts
Morality therefore covers human acts
and not acts of man.
KINDS OF VOLUNTARY ACTS
IMPEDIMENT OF HUMAN ACTS
PRINCIPLE OF DOUBLE EFFECT
STOP PRINCIPLE
Last week, we made it clear that what
we moralize or judge as good or bad is
the human act and not the acts of man
nor the person who is the doer of the
action. In the ancient time when there
were no formulated norms yet which we
now call law/s, what were their bases
or norms to judge people’s actions or
practices? Let us first look at the
etymology of the word morality or
moral. The word “moral” originated
from the Latin word “mores” which
means manner or custom/s which are
widely used within a particular society
or culture. So, the norms for people at
that time were the established practices
called customs. Example in the
Philippine context, people do not state
the rule such as “honor your
parents/elders” but they teach us the
customs on how to do such like saying
“po or opo” or “pagmamano” and
others.
Even in ways of dressing, our elders
had their customs on how to do it to be
respectful and others. So, it is now
clear to us that the customs set by our
elders before were the norms for people
to live a good life and to have a good
relationship with one another. From its
etymology, moral means good, if you
put a prefix “im”, immoral means bad.
There are actions which are generally
not judge as good nor bad, this is called
amoral or indifferent act. Amoral or
indifferent acts are the same with the
acts of man. Therefore, if you follow the
norms of society which in the ancient
time were customs, traditions, and
other practices, then your action is
good, if not then what you are doing is
bad.
What is lacking on the norms set by our
elders during their time? They are just
general guidelines on how people
should live a good life and how to
sustain good relationship with each
other. There is no criteria on how are
we going to moralize or judge very
specific human actions to see if they are
really good or bad. Even most of our
laws today are still too general as bases
to moralize human actions. They
cannot give an exact judgment or exact
amount or degree of reward or penalty
which corresponds to the action
committed. With this, we need specific
criteria.
Elements in Determining the
Morality of Human Acts
1. The Act (The Object)
There are actions that the act itself will
reveal if it is good or bad. There is no
need for norms or rules to base on to
see their quality. Examples: Killing,
stealing, cheating.; these acts are
clearly or obviously bad. Praying,
attending the Holy Mass; these actions
are obviously good.
2. Purpose or Intention (The End
of the act) –WHY?
A lot of our action is done with an
intention or purpose – the reason
behind the act. Although generally we
do things with a good intention, there
are also instances where some will
really do an action with a bad intention.
3. Circumstance (involves: place,
time, person, manner)
This refers to the persons involved, the
time, place, and occasion that surround
the act. In other words, it answers the
questions: ‘WHO’, ‘WHEN’, ‘WHERE’
and ‘HOW’. This can change or
completely alter the moral quality of a
human act. Circumstance is a
condition modifying human actions,
either by increasing or diminishing the
moral responsibility.
It plays an important role in affecting
the morality of an action because
human acts are performed at a definite
time and place, in a particular manner,
for a certain reason, etc. All of which, in
one way or another, increase or
diminish the responsibility of the
action. Circumstance can make a good
action evil, as when a guard on duty
goes to sleep.
It can increase or minimize the guilt of
the individual as when a student lies
to his/her teacher when he/she cheats.
Since all human actions occur at a
certain time and place, the
circumstance must always be
considered in evaluating the moral
quality of any human act.
Principles for Judging the Morality of
Human Acts (application of the three
criteria above)
1. An act is morally good if the 3 (Act,
Purpose and Circumstance) are
substantially good. Examples:
Helping, Studying, working, etc.
2. If one of the three is evil, the act is
evil.
Helping one to steal, studying how to
easily kill someone (what is evil here is
the intention)
3. Circumstance may create, mitigate or
aggravate sin/culpability
Circumstance can create, lessen or
increase or even remove one’s
culpability (guilt, penalty)
Example: walking on a newly cemented
area is bad since alam na this, how
about if the one who walked on that
area is a two years old girl? Will you
moralize her action? Of course not.
4. For amoral act or indifferent act, its
morality will be judge by its purpose
and circumstance.
ex: throwing a stone, walking, etc.
how about if one intentionally stepped
on the newly cemented area?
Obviously, such action is bad.
5. An act which is intrinsically evil is
not morally allowed regardless of any
circumstance.
ex: killing, suicide, adultery, rape,
and the likes.
a. A good act done for a bad end
becomes bad.
Example: Politicians who gave relief
goods to people who were greatly
affected by the mass flooding taking
advantage of the situation to campaign
for the election.
b. A bad act done for a good end does
not become good
Example: When a father put the justice
into his hands and kills the murderer of
his daughter to take revenge for her
death.
c. The end does not justify the
means. (The end or purpose does not
justify the means or manner) This is
almost the same with letter b. No
matter how good the purpose is if the
manner or way or act is bad then it is
not morally allowed.
Example: A student cheats during
examination to pass and obtain
scholarship in a university. Recall also
the Robinhood story.
c. The end does not justify the
means. (The end or purpose does not
justify the means or manner) This is
almost the same with letter b. No
matter how good the purpose is if the
manner or way or act is bad then it is
not morally allowed.
Example: A student cheats during
examination to pass and obtain
scholarship in a university. Recall also
the Robinhood story.
d. An indifferent act may become
morally good or bad. (depending on
the purpose/intention)
Example: To study law is in itself an
indifferent action. It becomes good
when inspired by the thought of
alleviating human sufferings or making
a decent living. It becomes bad if it is
intended to perform illegal or immoral
actions.
An elder brother who puts hot sauce on
a cake before giving it to a begging
younger brother, so that the younger
brother will not ask for more, and the
elder can have the cake all to himself.
e. Choose the lesser evil (if no other
options or it is the last resort)
This is only allowed if there are
no other options and the situation is a
matter of life and death where you need
to decide at that very moment.
Other Moral Principles Based on the
Three Criteria of Morality
Why not give the same punishment for
the same crimes?
Aside from the purpose and
circumstance which can lessen or
increase the culpability of a bad action,
there are also other factors which affect
the manner or the reason why a person
committed such an act. Not all acts are
done perfectly by the doer/agent. There
are the so-called kinds of human act or
specifically called kinds of voluntary act
Human Acts
WILLFUL- KNOWN
KINDS OF VOLUNTARY ACT
1. Perfect Voluntary act - the is act
done with full knowledge and full
consent.
2. Imperfect V.A. – the act is done with
some defect in the knowledge or
consent.
3. Simple V.A.- the act is done by the
agent because he/she simply likes
doing it.
4. Conditional V.A – the act is done
with a condition. “if”
5. Direct V.A - the act is intended by
the agent
6. Indirect V.A - the act is not intended
by the agent but an effect or result of
the act which is directly intended.
Example: I intentionally threw a stone
to the window but it bounced back and
hit my playmates.
7. Actual V.A – the act is spontaneous;
an act is a result of an intention done
here and now.
8. Virtual V.A – an act done is a result
of a previous intention (which may have
been forgotten) – it is like the act is
planned.
9. Habitual V.A – the act done is a
result of habit.
10. Interpretative V.A. - an act
influenced by an intention which is
presumed (interpreted) to be present in
an agent who lacks the ability to
express his actual intention. Example:
A mute person is asking you
something through sign language, and
you are the one who will interpret what
he/she is asking and you did or gave it.
These kinds of voluntary act are great
factors which will affect the judgement
of a certain action.
Point for Reflection: Which of these
kinds of Voluntary Act is the most
culpable if the act committed is bad?
IMPEDIMENTS TO HUMAN ACTS
Principle of Double Effect
Human actions, though naturally a
product of will and reason, are
sometimes influenced by many factors.
These factors can intervene and bar
one’s actions from being human or
contribute to the reduction of the
quality of a certain action. Since they
can bar one’s faculties like the mind in
performing a human act, these are
called impediments to human acts.
These impediments reduce the quality
of human acts and so affects the
judgement or morality of human acts.
1. Ignorance
Ignorance – pertains to the lack of
pertinent information as to the nature,
circumstances and effect of a certain
action. Either in commission or
omission, the willful lack of initiative to
properly understand the whole picture
of the circumstance affects the moral
quality of an action.
Ignorance takes place when an
individual consciously proceeds to act
on a certain matter without due
consideration of the relevant o
necessary information related to it.
Usually, this takes place when someone
unconsciously violates certain rules
and regulations. When asked to be
made responsible for the action
committed, one asserts that he/she
must not be held accountable since
he/she was unaware that such was a
violation. This example is a clear
manifestation on how ignorance
Ignorance is classified into:
a. Invincible Ignorance – This refers
to a total ignorance of the person about
the circumstance and other factors
surrounding the action that she/he
committed. This total ignorance is
unintentional.
b. Vincible Ignorance – This is an
ignorance that can be
dispelled/removed or learned through
ordinary efforts, conscientiousness and
proper diligence. There are two forms of
vincible ignorance:
• Crass Ignorance (lack of effort) –
happens when a person exerts little
effort to dispel his ignorance.
• Affected Ignorance – is a willful act of
asserting one’s ignorance in order to
plead innocence to a charge of guilt in
doing or not doing an act. The act is
pretended. An example is a student
who pretends not to know the school’s
policy on proper haircut when
confronted by the guards.
Morality of Actions done under
Ignorance:
• Wrong actions done under Invincible
ignorance is not culpable; because of
one’s unintentional total ignorance.
Example: A person who does not know
how to read and write caught for
jaywalking. You cannot penalize
him/her since he/she is totally
ignorant about the norm.
• Wrong action done under Crass
Ignorance is culpable but the
culpability can be lessened. This is so,
since the person exerted little effort to
dispel his/her ignorance despite the
opportunities to do so.
• Bad action done under Affected
Ignorance is totally culpable. In fact,
the culpability could increase since the
person just pretended his/her
ignorance
2. Concupiscence:
Happens when inordinate passion
hinders one to exercise correct
reasoning.
Passions are the emotional elements
such as pride, anger, love, joy, and the
likes. Concupiscence happens when
these passions push the person in
doing a certain act without the
intervention of reasoning or mind.
Examples: Suddenly punching someone
out of wrath, destroying someone’s
image out of envy, having pre-Marital
sex with someone due to being in loved,
etc.
Two kinds of Concupiscence
(ante = before, consequent = after)
a. Antecedent Concupiscence – A
spontaneous inordinate passion
influences an action before it is
controlled by the will. The act abruptly
or suddenly happens. This is called
“gavva lang” in Ibanag.
For example, Juan was allegedly
running late for his class. When he
entered the school campus, the guard
confiscated his ID for no apparent
reason. Out of anger, he cursed the
guard.
b. Consequent Concupiscence –
happens when the intellect is aware of
the inordinate passion and the will still
choses to arouse the said passion and
proceed with the act. So, it is pre-
meditated. Example: you got angry
with your classmates and after many
hours or even a day, you did not calm
your anger and still wanted to punch
your classmates and you did it.
Morality of Actions done under
Concupiscence
• Bad actions done under Antecedent
Concupiscence are still culpable but the
culpability can be lessened or can even
be negated. This is so since the action
was abrupt and so not intentional.
• Bad actions done under Consequent
Concupiscence are totally culpable.
3. Fear
Fear – happens when the individual is
threatened by impending danger. The
existence of danger or threats can limit
one’s ability to use the will and reason
and merely acts base on the instinct to
survive or overcome the situation.
There are two kinds of Fear.
Two Kinds of Fear
a. Light Fear: The impending
danger or threat is light or somewhat
like remote. Example is, your classmate
tells you that he will slap you if you will
not give in to his demand.
b. Grave Fear: The impending
danger or threat is so serious like a
matter of life and death choices.
Example is when your classmate
demands something from you with his
gun pointed at your head.
Morality of Actions done under Fear:
Bad action done with light or grave fear
are both culpable. This is because,
despite the presence of the threat, one
can still choose to do what he/she
prefers to do, although the consequence
can really affect the decision.
Point to ponder: Which is more
culpable? Bad action done under light
fear or under grave fear? Which
culpability can be lessened? Bad action
done under light fear or under grave
fear?
4. Violence
4. Violence – (physical attack) is the
application of physical force upon a
resisting person to compel him/her to
do or not to do an act like protecting
oneself and others. There are two
persons involve here, the one who
attacks and the one who defends
her/himself. What we judge here is the
reaction of the one being attacked since
the act of the one who attacks is
understood as bad.
Self-defense is a classic example for
violence. With the presence of fear, one
has to protect himself/herself against
his/her perpetrator. Self-defense
means, there is no intention to kill
one’s perpetrator but only to defend
oneself.
Morality of actions done under Search for the fact/s. Study what is the
violence issue behind one’s problems or
dilemmas and other related situations.
If you are on the act of defending
yourself against your perpetrator like a Think for alternatives. This is necessary
rapist or killer or kidnapper and if your proposed action is not clear or
unintentionally, you killed him/her, are not sure.
you culpable? Of course not, but if you
Others are to be considered for advice.
intended to kill your perpetrator while
Ask others’ advice or suggestions if you
defending yourself, then you are
are hard up.
culpable although your culpability can
be lessened. Pray for guidance and wisdom. Pray to
God for enlightenment about the issue
5. Habit
or problem.
5. Habit – Firm and stable behavior
One should apply STOP if one is
pattern of acting. An individual
doubting, confused, emotionally
naturally and consciously, although
disturbed, things are unclear etc.
most often unconsciously performs an
action, as a result of its repetitive General Moral Principle:
performance through time. With the
presence of habit, an individual act One should not act nor decide if one is
based on his/her repeated responses to doubting, confused, emotionally
situations. disturbed, problematic, things are
unclear and other same circumstances.
Good habits are called virtues while bad
habits are vices. Obviously, we only Point to ponder:
moralize bad habits and not the good What will happen or what could be the
ones. Examples of your habits is probable result if one acts immediately
speaking bad words as a reaction to when he/she is still confused,
situations, like “ko diablo” or “diablo ka problematic or controlled by passions?
ko” or “pesti”, or always causing trouble What is the worst thing that one can do
in a party when drunk, etc. if he will act under these
circumstances?

Morality of actions done under bad DOUBLE EFFECT

habit
Bad actions done because of habit are
culpable. The culpability is lessened
only when the person exerts utmost
effort to free himself/herself from a
vicious habit.
The S-T-O-P Principle
What is Double Effect?
There are actions which have two
effects (good and bad).
One is allowed to do an act with two
effects (good and bad) under the
following conditions
1. The act must be good or at least
morally indifferent.
 2. The evil effect must not precede
the good effect or at least they
should happen simultaneously.
So, the good effect must come
first before the bad one if ever.
3. There must be a sufficient
reason to do the act. Sufficient to
do the act means like helping
one to escape death or escape
danger and the likes.
4. The intention of the agent is
honest. There should be no
other intention than to do good
like the ones mentioned as
sufficient reasons above.
An example of this is a
physician/doctor operating a pregnant
woman with the expected effects if ever
like the mother might die in the process
or the baby in her womb might die or
even the two might die. Point to ponder:
What should be the intention of the
physician in proceeding with the
operation? Should he/she intend to
save only the mother, or the baby, or
both, or kill both or what?