Formation in Morality is at the forefront of the
development of the faith of a Christian. To live a
moral life entails that Christians conform to the
life and teachings of Jesus. However, for them to
live a moral life, it is crucial that they understand
what morality is and to unlearn all sorts of
misconceptions. For a clear understanding of
morality, one is able to ascertain what action is
appropriate and necessary for a certain
circumstance. With this, the concept of morality
must be very clear to the human person since this
will be his/her very guide for his/her day to day
living.
 
          Before going to the unique or specified
Christian sources of morality this lesson will first
present the basic concepts on how Christians
arrived with their different general moral norms
so that we will be able to connect the different
concepts or norms of morality laid for the human
person.
 
         The Descriptive title of our course
is Christian Morality in Our Times. First and
foremost, 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?
 
       Morality is a science that deals with the
“quality” (goodness or badness) of human
acts/actions. “science” generally means a field of
study.  So, Morality will 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.    
            
       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   .
 
Sources 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.
 
                      →   God (man is a creature of God)
    Origin:
                       →  Apes (man came from apes)
 
            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.
          
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 10 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 pat of your moral norms.
 
         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.
 
1. Human Nature / Natural law (since
man is part of the whole nature or
Creation)
           The same with the concept of the origin of
the human person, 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.
1. 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 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.
      
           With the presentation of the different
sources of moral norms, I hope it now clear to us
why there are norms or laws which we find not
compatible what we believe especially with our
views on the origin and the destiny for the human
person. There are also norms/laws which we find
not compatible with our basic nature as human
persons. These norms which we strongly believe
as not good for us are what we
call misconceptions on morality. So, coming up
with “wrong” norms is a product of one’s
misconceptions of morality. The misconceptions
on morality are just product of the “wrong”
concept of the origin, nature, and the destiny for
the human person.  
           Summarizing what is being discussed
above, morality is centered on norms use to judge
human acts/actions or other practices of society
whether they are good or bad. The nearest and
best basis to come up with moral norms is the
nature of the human person and his/her
surroundings/environment since for some people,
the origin and destiny for the human person is
still unclear or for them others’ belief on those
matters is unacceptable.
           As stated in the beginning of this
discussion, for us Christians, the two basic ways
on how we arrived with our moral norms are
Philosophy (Moral Philosophy) and Theology
(Moral Theology). Formally defining the two will
be as follows: 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).
         
Our course Christian Morality is based on both
Moral Philosophy and Moral Theology. Christian
Norms are product of these two fields of science.
 o  Metaphysical (meta = beyond) aspects such
as intellect, emotion, conscience and others.
 
Human Nature/The Human Person           What is the Implication of the Human
  Nature to Morality? Going direct to the point,
Who or what is the Human person based on what does your nature has to say to your actions?
Nature? As we have stated above, our actions flow from
  our nature. Example, if you are historical beings,
Since the actions of the human person flows from then you must learn from your past experiences;
what he/she is, we need to discuss his/her nature if you are a loving being, you must always desire
by enumerating its essential characteristics.    what is good for others; if you are a rational
  being, then think before you act; if you are
  transcendental, then you are not satisfied with
o Rational being - The human person your present achievements, or it will lead us to
has intellect/mind/reason. He/she discovers ask and reflect that if we are transcendental, are
things by reason, and he/she is the only we heading to a certain destiny?; if we are body
animal who knows that he/she knows. persons, do we need to take care of mother earth?
He/she thinks, rationalize, reflect and other and the likes. Among these traits of the nature of
activities of the intellect. the human person, which should regulate the
others and his/her human actions/decisions?
o  Free-will. The human person is free/
          Among the nine traits stated above, the one
has freedom which means he/she has two or which should always regulate the others or human
more options or choices and also actions
has will which is the power to act or not to which proceed from the other traits
act on his/her choices. Will is the power is Conscience. This is because using the other
to do or not to do or to act or not to act.        traits like intellect or freewill alone without the
o Conscience. – is the practical judgment of intervention of Conscience can lead to misuse, or
the intellect on what is good or what is bad, abuse of human actions. Example is thinking, if
and is prompting the person to always you are problematic, you can think of some bad
do/follow what is good.                   actions as a solution to your problems which in
o Loving being – Aside from the love between the end is not the case, but it will just add or
opposite sex which is designed for the complicate your problem.   
continuity of the human species, generally,            
loving means desiring the good of others.              Since we are Christians who strongly believe
in the existence of a Creator (Theos or God) as
o Body - Person – We have a flesh (physical the origin of all and the proper destiny which this
part), which connects us to the material Creator prepared for us, we also need to look at
world. Our bodies(physical part) is the other traits of the human person based on this
dependent on nature/earth. Our bodies use perspective.
the elements of the earth. The death
of mother earth will also be the death of our  
bodies.                                                               
Who/What is the human person in a Theological
o Sexual – refers to being male or Perspective/View?
female which is intended for companionship
and pro-creation.                                             
o Unique though Social: - We  Masterpiece of God (God’s Image and
are individuals and need independence but likeness): If we are the image and likeness
we are also social being: live with others. of God, means we reflect some of the
These two are inseparable. We are important characteristics of this God such
individuals and need independence but we as goodness, loving, just, compassionate and
also need the presence of others to complete many  others. So, if God is good, then
ourselves.                                                          basically we are also good; if God is just, we
are also basically just, and others.                 
o Historical: We have a continuity with the
past.                                                                     Fundamentally/innately good or moral
being: No human person is bad or evil, only
o Transcendental: We always aim higher, to our wrong actions are bad or evil and not
surpass our achievements, since we are the human person.                                           
longing for completeness or total
satisfaction/contentment. This also means  God’s partner / “co-creators” of God. God
that the human person has. . .                          created the world and us as “incomplete” or
imperfect so our mission is to develop or
 bring ourselves and our world to perfection.
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 designed for      pro-creation.            Commandments.
 Rational being– has intellect or reasoning or
mind.
 Freewill – has freedom and will which
he/she can use to act or not to act.                  the destiny for the human person since we also said
 Brother’s keeper (social, and communal):
we need to take care of others aside from
ourselves.                                                         
 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. Point for
reflection: What if God created us as
perfect beings, what will you do?                    Hedonism
 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.  the norm for human action is to look for
 Transcendental: this pushes us to look for
the ultimate meaning of life and ultimately
to our God.                                                       
 Children/family of God. We belong to the
family of God, formally through Baptism.                  A philosophy by Karl Marx which looks at
 Destined for the Kingdom. We have our
destiny which we commonly call “heaven”
or “paradise” or in Jesus’ words called the
Kingdom of God.
 
            Basically, most of these traits of the human
person in this Theological respective are the same with
those traits based on Nature since these are parts of the
basic nature of the human person. There are just other
traits which are rooted in our connectedness with our
Creator. So, for its relevance to Morality, we have to
ask the same question, what do these traits of the
human person in the Theological view say on how
he/she should act or live?  The same answer, that these
traits of the human person should strongly influence
how he/she acts or live his/her life. In
the formulation of specific norms for the human
person, these traits should be strongly considered since
these are the ones which will help direct the human
person to perfection/completeness or to his/her proper
destiny which we call the Kingdom of God. The same
clarification also that 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
          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
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
         Most if not all of these other views or concept of
the destiny for the human person are just product of
philosophizing (Philosophy).
            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,
pleasure/pleasurable things.
 
Marxism:
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 ourselves. “all for one, one for all”.
 
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.
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.           his/her Creator and freely attain his/her full
          Norm: Follow the teachings of God such as the
Ten Commandments and others.
 
          As you may have noticed in our discussion, the
view of the nature of the human person and his/her
ultimate destiny plays a very crucial role in laying out
norms for human actions or for his/her way of living.
As we have said in our past discussions, “wrong”
concept of the nature and the destiny for the human
person cause a lot of misconceptions about morality
and produces a lot of wrong principles or norms.
Examples of these wrong principles/norms of morality
are the following:
1. Morality is a matter of opinion. This means
that moral norms are subjective; depends on
the person.
2. All opinions about morality are equal and
correct. Therefore, all opinions should be
followed.
3. Morality is outside the world of practical
people. Whatever impractical is not good.
4. Morality develops guilt and moral obligation
which makes life unhappy. So, we need to set
aside moral norms.
 Morality is an encompassing concept that serves
as the underlying force for every action of an
individual and of a society. Morality 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:
        Why do we need to follow certain standards or set
of norms? In our past discussions, we answered this by
saying that we need norms since some of the faculties
of the human person like freedom and is/her passions
can be exercised in an abusive manner or even
destructive to the person himself/herself and to others.
Going deeper, why do we need to use our faculties in a
wise or good way? Will it lead us to a higher end? This
will tell us that there are noble reasons why we need to
follow set of norms which are the following below:
 
1.          For the Fullness of Freedom ---- for the
human person to be totally free.
 God created the human person as a rational
being, conferring him/her the dignity of an
individual who can initiate and control his/her
actions. 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
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.
2.          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.
 3.         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
4.          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.
 
5.          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.
HUMAN ACTS ACTS OF MAN
Deliberate Indeliberate
Free Not free
Voluntary Involuntary
Conscious “Unconscious”
Willful Unwillful
Known “Unknown”
Aware “Unaware”
1. Intellect and Free Will
            Intellect, freedom, will, and passions needs
moral norms so for them not to be abuse, misuse or
overuse.
1. 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.
1. 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
          We have been talking about norms, rules,
standards or laws of which is being use by morality to
judge our actions. To clarify this, what does morality
judge as good or bad?  Is it the human person or his
actions? 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 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.
1. 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.
1. 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.
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
 There are three determinants of morality for us to
assess the quality of human actions.
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.
 
1. 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. Example: helping is generally good,
but some people will help a poor girl with the intention
of seducing her; then, helping which was supposed to
be a good action became bad in that instance. Studying
is also good; but how about studying how to make a
bomb to kill people whom you envy? This is how
crucial the intention is as part of the criteria in
moralizing human acts.
 
1. 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.
1. 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)
1. Circumstance may create, mitigate
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.
1. 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.
 
1. An act which is intrinsically evil is not
morally allowed regardless of any
circumstance.
     ex:  killing, suicide, adultery, rape, and the likes.
Other Moral Principles Based on the Three
Criteria of Morality
 
o 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.
 
o 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.
 
o 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.       
o An indifferent act may become morally good
or bad. (depending on the purpose/intention)
or 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.
o  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.
o 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
KINDS OF VOLUNTARY ACT
1.        Perfect Voluntary act - the is act done
with full knowledge and full consent.
1.        Imperfect V.A. – the act is done with
some defect in the knowledge or consent.
1.        Simple A.- the act is done by the agent
because he/she simply likes doing it.
1.        Conditional A – the act is done with
a condition. “if”      
1.        Direct A - the act is intended by the agent.
1.        Indirect 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.
1.        Actual A – the act is spontaneous; an act
is a result of an intention done here and now.
1.        Virtual A – an act done is a result of a
previous intention (which may have been
forgotten) – it is like the act is planned.
1.        Habitual A – the act done is a result of
habit.
1.        Interpretative 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.
IMPEDIMENTS TO HUMAN ACTS
            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 – 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 directly alters the
moral quality of an action.
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: 
          Ash Wednesday is the beginning of the Lenten
Season in the Catholic Liturgical Calendar (calendar of
worship celebrations). Lent is 40 days. As we discussed
in CFED  1013, 40 days in the Old Testament
symbolizes time for purification. It is time for us to
purify ourselves and undergo conversion and return to
the Lord if we have not been doing good in our past days.
It is time for repentance and metanoia. Ash is a symbol
of mortality, and people in the Old Testament use it when
they ask for forgiveness from the Lord.  Aside from
using ash, there are also two things that we (Catholics)
do during Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Fasting and
Abstinence.  Fasting does not mean you will not eat the
whole day. It means take one full meal a day.
Out of your three meals, you should get full only once,
and take little food for the other two meals. Aside from
purification, fasting also means sacrifice, that we share in
the sacrifice of Christ who suffered for our
sins. Abstinence. This means do not eat meat. Point to
ponder: If you go to a so called “burol ng patay” and they
will offer you food with a meat as your “ulam”. How do
you feel? In line with this, we also respect the body of
Christ which suffered and died for our sins. As Catholics,
we are expected to practice these two. Anyway, we are
only required to do these during Ash Wednesday and
Good Friday.  Two days only, while other sects do not
eat blood for the whole of their lives. Fasting and
abstinence also means abstain from doing other
pleasurable things or from joyous moments during these
days. “ Nagfasting ka nga ng food pero naglaro ka naman
ng favorite mong games the whole day, e nawala,na yung
essence ng pagfasting mo! These two days are the
official days for us to practice fasting and
abstinence. Other Fridays of the year is just
recommended but not obligatory. Why Friday? Because
Jesus died on a Friday. For your assignment, research on
the exemptions or who are exempted from doing fasting
and abstinence.
         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)
1. 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.                                                      and others. There are two persons involve here, the one
2. 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
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:
 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.
 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 (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
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 violence
   If you are on the act of defending yourself
against your perpetrator like a rapist or killer or
kidnapper and unintentionally, you killed him/her, are
you culpable? Of course not, but if you intended to kill
your perpetrator while defending yourself, then you are
culpable although your culpability can be lessened.
 
5. Habit – Firm and stable behavior pattern of acting.
An individual naturally and consciously, although
most often unconsciously performs an action, as a
result of its repetitive performance through time. With
the presence of habit, an individual act based on
his/her repeated responses to situations.
Good habits are called virtues while bad habits
are vices. Obviously, we only moralize bad habits and
not the good ones. Examples of your habits is speaking
bad words as a reaction to situations, like “ko diablo”
or “diablo ka ko” or “pesti”, or always causing trouble
in a party when drunk, etc.
 
Morality of actions done under bad 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
There is one good practice which is very helpful in
dealing with passions and dilemmas or problems in
life. This is called the STOP principle.
 
S – Search for the fact/s. Study what is the issue
behind one’s problems or dilemmas and other related
situations.
T – Think for alternatives. This is necessary if your
proposed action is not clear or not sure.  womb might die or even the two might die.
Point to ponder: What will happen or what could be
the probable result if one acts immediately when
he/she is still confused, problematic or controlled by
passions? What is the worst thing that one can do if he
will act under these circumstances?
 
DOUBLE EFFECT – There are actions which have
two effects (good and bad)
Question: When are you allowed to proceed with an
action with these two effects?  
Principles of Double Effect
            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.
1. 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.
1. 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.
1. 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 hesr

O – Others are to be considered for advice. Ask others’

advice or suggestions if you are hard up.
P – Pray for guidance and wisdom. Pray to God for
enlightenment about the issue or problem.
 
*One should apply STOP if one is doubting, confused,
emotionally disturbed, things are unclear etc.
 
General Moral Principle:
One should not act nor decide if one is doubting,
confused, emotionally disturbed, problematic, things
are unclear and other same circumstances.