LAW - OBJECTIVE NORM OF MORALITY LAW I. Objectives: 1.

To understand that laws exist to maintain peace and order and ensure harmonious relationship among members of society. 2. To appreciate the law as being helpful to determine the right thing to do. 3. To determine the qualities that makes a good law. 4. To understand the different sources of law and how they complement one another. II. Content Ethical and moral principles and authority are all helpful guides in doing the right thing. At its best, law represents the accumulated wisdom of those who have gone before us. It represents the objective norm of morality against which we can measure our behavior. We have some degree of light in the solution of most of our moral problems because we have law to guide us, to show us the right thing to do. Very often we can look at the laws as the proper way to solve our problems. Law (derecho), in its general sense is the science of moral laws based on the rational nature of man, which governs his free activity for the realization of his individual and social ends, and which, by its very nature, is demandable and reciprocal. On the other hand, law (ley) in its specific sense is a rule of conduct, just and obligatory, promulgated by legitimate authority for common observance and benefit. God's law aids and protects freedom; it does not limit it. Freedom does not mean license. License is doing whatever you want whenever you want. With license freedom is destroyed. What constitutes a good law? St. Thomas Aquinas gave the best definition of the law--it is an ordinance of reason promulgated for the common good by one who has charged of the society. His definition attributes the following characteristics to law: It is REASONABLE--they are the rational deliberations intended to guide towards what is good for them and the society. It is for the COMMON GOOD--that it must have its goal, that value is lying for good of the community upon which it is imposed. It must be PROMULGATED they are made known to the people who are bound to observe them. Indeed, the public must be aware of what is expected of them. It must be passed by ONE WHO HAS CHARGE OF SOCIETY--accordingly, only those who have the power and responsibility to govern have the power to enact the law. Laws are necessary to man. They regulate human activity. Without laws, the best intentions will be thwarted either by oneself or by others. Without laws there will be anarchy and chaos because each one will act according to his own wishes without regard for the common good. A. Classification of Laws:

1. Natural law: a law in which the way things are based on how God made them. It refers to the laws that are built into the nature of life itself. 2. Divine Law: law given to us by God to help us in our journey towards him. The Decalogue and the Beatitudes are excellent epitome of the divine law. 3. Civil Law: it is the particular application of the natural law in a given society. It is a law that serves as guidelines to doing what is right for smooth functioning of members in society. Thus, it safeguards relationship among individual citizens. Belonging to a society brings with it certain

duties, obligations or responsibility. 4. Church Law: it is the particular application of the divine law in a given faith community. It serves as guidelines to doing what is right for smooth functioning of the Christian community. Belonging to a particular faith community likewise brings with it certain duties. B. Ecclesiastical Laws: What civil law is to natural law, Church law is to divine law. Belonging to a particular society brings with it certain obligations. So too, belonging to a particular faith community brings with it certain duties. The most important laws for the Catholic Church are described below. 1. To keep holy the day of the Lord's resurrection--to worship God by participating in Mass every Sunday and holy days of obligation. 2. To lead a sacramental life--to receive Holy Communion frequently and the sacrament of penance regularly. 3. To study Catholic teachings in preparation for the sacrament of confirmation, to be confirmed, and then to study and advance the cause of Christ.] 4. To observe the marriage laws of the Church, to give religious training by example and word to one's children; to use parish schools and religious education programs. 5. To strengthen and support the Church--- one's own parish community and parish priest, the worldwide church and the Pope. 6. To do penance, including abstaining from meat and fasting from food on appointed days. 7. To do the missionary spirit and apostolate of the Church. CONSCIENCE - SUBJECTIVE NORM OF MORALITY CONSCIENCE: SUBJECTIVE NORM OF MORALITY Objectives: 1. Know and understand the characteristics, significance and role of conscience in moraldecision making. 2. Prize conscience as guidepost in making moral decision in life. 3. Evaluate one's level of conscience. Content: A. Definition of Conscience. Conscience is the subjective norm of morality because it directly confronts an action as good or bad. Its function is to examine, judge and pass a "sentence" on all moral actions. The word is derived from the Latin word "conscientia" which means "trial of oneself" both in accusations and in defense. Conscience is understood as the judgment or dictate of the practical intellect deciding from general principles the goodness or wrongness of some act which is to be done here and now or has been done in the past. Conscience is a judgment or dictate of the practical intellect, since it is not a power or a habit but an act, the application of knowledge to an individual fact, and this application is a judgment or dictate of the practical intellect. Therefore conscience is not an act of the speculative intellect or of the will. Conscience derives its judgment from general principles, since it presupposes as true the general principles of faith and of natural reason, and applies these to an individual case. Therefore conscience does not pass judgment on the truths of faith and of reason but decides whether the act to be done (or which has been done) is in conformity with existing just law. Conscience decides the goodness or wrongness of some act, which is to be done here and now (or

has been done). Conscience is the subjective standard of morality and therefore an act is subjectively good or bad according to the judgment of conscience. The proper and primary function of conscience is to pass judgment on an act, which is to done, but it may also pass judgment on acts, which have been performed already. B. Difference between Conscience, Moral Habit (Synderesis), and Moral Science, Prudence, Natural law. a. Moral habit (Synderesis) is the habitual practical knowledge of the first principles whose proper act is to decide in a general way that good must be done and evil avoided, whereas conscience decides in an individual case what is to be done or omitted. The moral habit of man never errs, conscience do so. b. Moral Science deduces objective conclusions from the first principles whereas conscience is something subjective, which may or may not agree with moral science. c. Prudence is a virtue and therefore a habit; conscience on the other hand is an act. Sometimes, however, and act of prudence coincides with conscience. d. Natural Law embraces the objective principles of morality, whereas conscience uses these principles to decide whether an act should be performed or whether it should be omitted. C. Kinds of Conscience

1. Correct or True conscience judges what is good as good and what is evil as evil It is correct conscience which tells that getting the property of another without consent is stealing. It is also correct conscience, which judges that we ought to pay our debts. 2. Erroneous or false conscience judges incorrectly that what is good as evil and what is evil as good. Error may come from the following: a. Mistake in inferential thinking, such as deriving a wrong conclusion from a given moral principle. b. Ignorance of the law c. Ignorance of the fact and other circumstances modifying human actions. d. Ignorance of the future consequences especially those dependent on the free will of others. 3. Certain conscience is a subjective assurance of the lawfulness or unlawfulness of a certain act. This implies that the person is sure of his decisions. 4. Doubtful conscience is a vacillating conscience wherein it is unable to perform a definite judgment on a certain action. A doubtful conscience must first be allowed to settle its doubts before an action is performed. 5. Scrupulous conscience is a rigorous conscience extremely afraid of committing evil. It is meticulous and wants incontrovertible proofs before it acts. 6. Lax conscience is one, which refuses to be bothered about the distinction of good and evil. It rushes on and us quick to justify itself. 7. Perplex conscience judges wrongly that sin is committed both in the performance or omission of an act. Or the person fears that one commits a sin whether the person acts or not. 8. Pharasaical conscience minimizes grave sins but maximizes small ones.

D. Compulsory nature of conscience. "Our bond with the natural law" says Bernard haring is an exalted participation in the eternal law of God manifested by our conscience whose natural function is to reveal our likeness to god. Conscience therefore is aptly called the "voice of God". In so far as conscience operates within the realm of truth and sound reason it is compulsory. When error creeps in, we should always trace its roots in order to eradicate it. It is only when conscience compels us to act according to our rational insights that it is truly the "voice of God". But when it deviates from the correct norm, the it ceases to be rational, and is no longer the voice of God, but "our own evil work..." Conscience operating according to sound rational insights is infallible. It should be followed. E. Education of Conscience. One has the obligation to cultivate a clear and true conscience. This requires that we apply ourselves to the education of our conscience. This we can accomplish by studying and searching for truths in the laws and in the sciences since conscience is not independent from the treasury of knowledge available to each individual. Another method of education is the cultivation of good habits. This means that the practical truths we discover must be internalized and then externalized in actions. It is useless to appreciate the good ins abstract when we despise it in our concrete actions. Another method is to militate against evil, condemning it where we find it. Indifference to evil dulls the spirit. We must learn not only to turn our backs against evil but fight against it. Above all, we must learn how to use our freedom. To use it properly, we must understand it properly. "Human freedom" says haring " if it is true freedom in action, is not submission to the coercive pressure of external force, but self-fulfillment through inner love of the good in accordance with the pattern of the divine holiness which is the eternal law (lex eterna) reflected in man's own nature (lex naturalis). BASIC MORAL PRINCIPLES Basic Moral Principles. The complexity of human conditions is the reason that many Catholic theologians brought different principles as a way of solving moral problems. 1. Principle of Double Effect. The principle of double effect responds to the question, "In a given case, is the permission or causing of evil justified or not?" In answering this question we would be providing the criterion for certain types of moral dilemmas. Many theologians have considered St. Thomas Aquinas as the initiator of this principle. (Aquinas, III p. 64 a 7). Taken from the insight of St. Thomas, the manuals of theology generally propose the following four conditions under which one can be justified for causing evil in conjunction with good: a. The action itself is good or indifferent; b. The good effect and not the evil effect is one sincerely intended by the agent; c. The good effect is not produced by means of the evil effect. If the evil effect is not at least equally immediate causally with the good effect, it then becomes a means to the good effect and is intended as such; d. There is a proportionate reason for permitting the foreseen evil effect to occur. 2. Principle of Totality. In recent literature on moral theology, another principle, the principle of totality is contrasted with the principle of double effect. The latter is said to relate only to the justification of the "barely

permissible", while the principle of totality relates to the "justification of an effects willed for itself by reason of its connection with the whole order or purposes and goods". The principle of totality justifies an act such as the removal of a sick organ in order to save the whole organism. The principle of totality affirms that the part exists for the whole, and that, consequently, the good of the whole is the determining factor in regard to the part, and can dispose of the part in its own interest. 3. The Principle of Utility. The principle of utility contends that you have a moral reason to do whatever will best promote the general welfare. The principle of utility can also be described as the ethical attitude, which seeks to produce the greatest good for the greatest number. Since the morality of an action depends in some way on producing good or avoiding evil, it is also generally understood as a form of consequentialism. 4. The End does not justify the Means. To the doer, an act is a means for achieving an aim or purpose. We, for instance study in order to acquire knowledge to pass the course, to receive a degree, and to qualify for a job. It is however, wrong to attempt at a good purpose by dubious or evil means. A student may not cheat in an exam to graduate; an employee may not fake his documents in order to be promoted to a job; the public official may not accept bribe in order to feed his family. The axiom "the end does not justify the means" means that the worthiness of purpose does not make an evil act good. Nothing is more pernicious that for a hoodlum to believe that he is justified in robbing the rich because he wants to share the loot with the poor. Paul Glenn gives us the following insights on the effects of the motive on the action. (Glenn, Ethics, pp. 111-113). 1. An evil act, which is done on account of an evil motive, is grievously wrong. A youngster who steals from his parents in order to buy "shabu" for himself is committing s grievous wrong against himself and his parents. 2. A good action done on account of an evil motive becomes evil itself. The executive who gives a job to a lady applicant in order to seduce her later makes his kindness immoral because of his evil intentions. 3. A good action done on account of a good purpose acquires an additional merit. The father who foregoes his expensive hobby in order to send his children to school shows a deeper concern for the welfare of his love ones. 4. An indifferent act may either become good or bad depending on the motive. Opening the door of a house is an indifferent act. But the servant, who in connivance with the thieves opens the door of the house of the master, does a wrongful act. On the other hand, opening the door in order to give alms to the beggar is a good act. Christian Moral Principles. 1. The Value of Life Principle. This principle can be stated simply as follows: "Human beings should revere life and accept death." This principle reflects a concern for the preservation and protection of human life. It is perhaps the most basic and necessary principle because there can be no morality whatsoever without living human beings. Without human life, there can be no goodness or badness, justice or injustice, honesty or dishonesty, freedom or the lack of it. Life is a basic possession, the main possession of each individual human being. It is the one thing that all living human beings have in common, yet each individual experience life uniquely no one else can truly share or live another's life. Although we recognize life as basic and important in this principle, we also realize that no human life has been everlasting and that none probably will ever be. All of us must die sometime, therefore, "life at all costs" is not what the principle stands for, nor does it stand for the quality of life over its quality. It merely proposes that no life should be ended without very strong justification. 2. The Principle of Goodness or Rightness.

All moral systems are based on the idea that we should strive to be "good" human beings and attempt to perform "right" actions; and conversely, that we should both try not to be "bad" human beings and avoid performing "wrong" actions. By the very definition of the terms morality and immorality, we are concerned with being good and doing right. In actuality, the principle of goodness or rightness demands that human beings attempt to do three things: a. Promote goodness over badness and do good (beneficence). b. Cause no harm or badness (nonmaleficence). c. Prevent badness or harm (nonmaleficence). When we speak of moral man, life or action, we mean a good man, good life, and a right action; when we speak of an immoral man, life or action, we mean a bad man, a bad life, and a wrong action. 3. The Principle of Justice or Fairness. This principle concerns itself essentially with the distribution of good and bad on a just and fair basis. It says that human beings should treat other human beings fairly and justly in distributing goodness and badness among them. It is not enough that people should try to be good and to do what is right; there must also be some attempt made to distribute the benefits from being good and doing right. 4. The Principle of Truth Telling or Honesty. Human beings need to enter into relationships with each other with a sense of mutual trust, believing that whatever they say or do to one another will be as honest and open an expression of their thoughts and feelings as possible. Human beings are essentially very vulnerability we built defenses against exposing themselves to others. It is not even true that lying or dishonesty might not be justified; however it is true that strong attempt must be made to be truthful and honest in human relationships because morality, in the final analysis, depends on what people say and do. For example, suppose that A borrows money from B and agrees to pat it back, but then does not. When B asks A for the money, A says that he does not intend to pay it back and never did. Now, when the money was borrowed and loaned, there was a mutual sense of trust involved in that B was going to help A out by loaning him money, and A was going to pay it back the money, the sense of mutual trust is broken, not only for this one transaction and relationship but also, perhaps, for any future relationships that B might have with A or with other people. The problem is that the basis of human relationship is communication, and when communication is eroded by lying or dishonesty, that basis is destroyed, and meaningful human relationship especially those in the moral sphere becomes impossible. All human relationship are based on communication and because morality is the most important of human relationship, it is absolutely necessary that truth telling and honesty be considered fundamental and basic to nay moral systems. 5. The Principle of Individual Moral Freedom. This principle means that people, being individuals with individual differences, must have the freedom to choose their own ways and means of being moral. It must be understood that individual moral freedom is limited by the other four principles: the necessity of treating human beings justly in distributing goodness and badness and finally, the necessity of telling the truth and being honest. Human beings are at different stages of development, have different talents and abilities and different feelings, wants and needs and if we are not to completely obliterate these differences that must be recognize and allowed for. The only way to allow form them is to let individuals live out their lives in whatever unique and different ways they choose. There is no possible way that one human life can be lived by anyone other than the person who is living it. Therefore, we must accept each human being as he or she is. This acceptance amounts to granting to all individuals the freedom to live out their lives in ways best suited to them, Morality could not exists if human beings were not to some extent free to make moral choices and decisions.