Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
135 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Who Wrote "Moral Theology: It's Nature, Purpose, & BIblical Foundation?" |
W. May |
|
|
Who wrote"God's Call to Human Kind?" |
L. O'Connell |
|
|
Who wrote Lumen Gentium? |
Second Vatican Council |
|
|
Who wrote "responding to Love in Love?" |
K. O'Neil & P. Black |
|
|
Who wrote Veritatis Splendor? |
John Paul II |
|
|
Who wrote "Circumstances, Intentions & Intrinsically Evil Acts?" |
B. Hoose |
|
|
Who wrote "THe Hermeneutic Function of the Principle of Double Effect?" |
P. Knauer |
|
|
Who wrote "Sin & the Moral Life?" |
W. May |
|
|
What are the two dimensions of Life as an Endeavor? |
Cognitive Dimension and Conative Dimension |
|
|
What is the Striving Dimension known as? |
Conative Dimension |
|
|
What is an example of the Conative Dimension? |
Putting things into action |
|
|
What is the knowing dimension of life as an endeavor? |
Cognitive Dimension |
|
|
What is an example of the cognitive dimension? |
Who we are and what we are to do and be |
|
|
What is the tension in life as an endeavor? |
Tension between act/potency because "things are not as they should be" "We are not yet who are are meant to be" |
|
|
What is the perception of tension? |
Human Reason (incomplete) and Divine Revelation (explication of Human Reason) |
|
|
What is Theology? |
The study of God with Methodological Distinctiveness |
|
|
What are the subdivisions of Theology |
Radical Unity and Specificity |
|
|
What is the function of Moral Theology? |
Help us to know the truth about the good |
|
|
WHat is the purpose of moral theology? |
Help us to do what is good and to become good (i.e. sanctification) |
|
|
What are the sources of Moral Theology? |
Natural Reason, and Divine Revelation |
|
|
What are examples of Natural Reason? |
Unity of Truth and Diversity in Modes of knowledge |
|
|
What are examples of divine revelation? |
Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition |
|
|
What then is another definition of Theology? |
Application of Natural Reason to the Data of Faith (For complementarity and Mutual Enrichment) |
|
|
Act/Potency Tension presupposes what? |
Destiny |
|
|
What is the Difference between Destiny and Fate? |
Destiny has a neutral connotation and had an allowance of free will Fate has a negative connotation and has a deterministic sense (like it will happen) |
|
|
Note on Destiny and Fate |
God has destined us to an end, and given us liberty to attain it (or not)... with the presupposition of self control |
|
|
What is the meaning of Vocation? |
Root of Vocare; meaning "to call" |
|
|
What are the common usages of Vocation? |
Religious sense (call of nuns, priests) Secular Sense (A job, training for a trade) Biblical Equivalent ( Qara in Hebrew or Kalein in Greek) |
|
|
Briefly summarize vocation |
Calling to a relationship with God |
|
|
What are the 3 characteristics of Vocation? |
Love, Fidelity, and Knowledge (there is an interrelation of Characteristics) |
|
|
Examples of Love Charact. of Vocation? |
Love of God and Love of Neighbor |
|
|
Examples of Fidelity Charact. of Vocation |
Fidelity to God and God's Law |
|
|
Examples of the Knowledge charact. of Vocation |
Who we love and how to please Him |
|
|
What are the effects of Sin on Humanity's Relationship with God? |
Initial Harmony Ruptured *We have an ongoing process of reconcilliation (Bible as Telenova) |
|
|
What are biblical covenants |
They are progressive revelation of God's Will *Culmination and Fulfillment in Christ |
|
|
What are features of Biblical Covenants? |
Sealed with Ritual Solemnity (regulated with Divine Authority) Sometimes unilateral Constitutive of Relationship (Israel as people Defined by Love) |
|
|
What is an example of Private Theologies of Vocation? |
The Idea of Soulmates (A Destined love) |
|
|
What does Christian Theology say on the Subject of Soulmates? |
1. They Exist 2. They Exist, But... 3. They don't exist |
|
|
Who proposed the Radical Objective? |
St. Alphonsus de Liguori |
|
|
What does the Radical Objective say? |
Religious Life as the Christian Ideal - Exceptionality of Demands and Commitment - Normativity of Marriage Providential Gift of Religious Vocation -Theoretical Freedom -Practical necessity |
|
|
Who proposed the Moderate Objective? |
Arthur Vermeersch, SJ |
|
|
How are the moderate and radical objective the same? |
Ideality of Religious Life and Obligation of Prayerful Discernment |
|
|
How are the moderate and radical objective different? |
Influences of Pursuit of Holiness - Prioritization of Pursuit of Holiness - Instrumentality of Various States - Practical Freedom in choosing a state |
|
|
Who proposed Radical Subjective? |
Laurence O'Connell |
|
|
What are the principal concern of Radical Subjective? |
Egalitarianism - De-emphasis on Religious, Clerical States -Prioritization of General Call to Holiness *Agency - Critique of Perceived Fatalism - False Problem? |
|
|
Summarize the Radical Subjective |
All states are "special" No Providential Gift of States |
|
|
What are critiques of the Radical Subjective Approach (positive) |
Positive - Religious, Clergy are not ipso facto Holier persons - Attaining Sanctity is possible in the lay state- Vocation is a response to God's Call |
|
|
Negative Critiques of Radical Subjective |
*Negative - Contradicts Historical Valorization of Religious, Clerical States-Exaggerates Personal Initiative in Choosing a State - Exaggerates Personal Initiative in Choosing a State -neglects communal element of vocational discernment - False opposition of Destiny and Agency |
|
|
Where was the official theology of vocation more discussed |
Second Vatican Council |
|
|
What are the competing Hermeneutics in 2VC? |
Hermeneutic of Rupture vs. of Reform |
|
|
What is the Hermeneutic of Rupture? |
Emphasis on Newness -> Council as a break Majority Interpretation (L. O'Connell) |
|
|
What is the Hermeneutic of Reform? |
Emphasis on continuity -> Council as development -unalterable substance - Contingent Historical Expressions -Minority Interpretation |
|
|
What are the Dogmatic Constitution of Lumen Gentium? |
Purpose of the Church and Nature of Church |
|
|
Give the four points under the nature of the Church |
1. Indefectibly Holy as an Institution 2. Question of Individual Sanctity 3. Hierarchical Society 4. Variegated Society |
|
|
What is the name of the Ecclesiology where Authority goes from top to bottom? |
Perfect Society Ecclesiology |
|
|
Draw the Structure of the Perfect Society Ecclesiology |
|
|
|
What are the Consequences of The Perfect Society? |
It is "exclusive" and There is a valorization of Specific States |
|
|
What is the name of the Ecclesiology that is shaped like circles? |
Baptismal Ecclesiology |
|
|
What is the focus on Baptismal Ecclesiology? |
By the Sacrament of Baptism |
|
|
Draw the Baptismal Ecclesiology |
|
|
|
What is the importance of Baptismal Ecclesiology? |
Readjustment of Emphasis - Recognition of Instrumentality of States * Consequences of Ecumenism |
|
|
Did St. Francis de Sales support more on Radical Objective, Moderate objective, or Radical Subjective? |
Moderate Objective and Radical Subjective since he believed that Religious life and secular vocation both have importance |
|
|
Does Evil exist? |
Evil as lack or absence of God's Love |
|
|
How does Liberalism Relate to evil? |
Always desire to do what is "good" but presupposes that people are good deep down |
|
|
How does Relativism relate to evil? (Anthropological and Philosophical) |
Anthropological Relativism: Cultural relativism in observing other cultures * Philo: There is no objective moral order; subjective preference - Different viewpoints - Emotivism; objective preference to others |
|
|
What are the two kinds of Relativism |
Anthropological/Descriptive * Philosophical/Normative |
|
|
How does Materialism relate to evil? |
Denying religious viewpoint, locates moral order to the individual/species level i.e. doing what is good for humans as a species |
|
|
What is Theodicy? |
Asking if God actually deserves our love * Benevolence vs. Omnipotence vs. Experience of Suffering |
|
|
What are the Christian Perspectives of Evil? |
1. It affirms the Existence* of evil 2. Origins of evil in the abuse of freedom *effects of original sin |
|
|
Why does Christianity affirm the existence of evil? |
Existence of objective moral order; origin of all evil in a single event; Evil as absence |
|
|
What are the effects of original sin? |
1. Darkening of intellect 2. Weakening of will (concupiscence) 3. Physical Suffering and Death 4. Shutting of the Gates of Heaven |
|
|
What are some contributions of Aristotlean Philosophy? |
St. Thomas Aquinas read his works * Metaphysics - Principle of non-contradiction > a thing cannot be and be at the same time - Transcendental of Being |
|
|
What are under the Transcendentals of Being? |
One: Indivisibility or negation of division True: Being qua intelligible Good: Being qua desireable - good: objective :: Value: subjective - Nietzchean critique |
|
|
What does the objectivity of goodness and subjectivity of value mean? |
Ampalaya, people don't like it, but still objectively good (not desired but is good) Nietzchean critique: inverts this idea, what we desire more is now whats good |
|
|
What is the Nietzchean Critique? |
inverts this idea, what we desire more is now whats good |
|
|
What did Thomas Aquinas Write? |
Summa Theologia |
|
|
What idea did Thomas Aquinas present? |
Evil as the absence of good - impossibility of ontologically evil thing Ontological goodness =/= Moral Goodness (principle of non-contradiction) |
|
|
What are the two distinctions of the absences of good? |
Negative and Privative |
|
|
Give an example of privative absence of good |
"Is not there, but should be" Mr. Johnson cannot breathe |
|
|
Give an example of negative absence of good |
Is not there Mr. Johnson cannot breathe fire |
|
|
True or false, Negative absences of good are not evils? |
True, cause nobody misses what he or she never needed |
|
|
True or false, Privative absences of the good are evils? |
True, because it prevents the fulfillment of our nature |
|
|
What are the two distinctions of Evil? |
Physical Evil and Moral Evil |
|
|
What kind of evil is, "Deviation of human volition from the prescriptions of the moral order and the action which results from that deviation"? |
Moral Evil |
|
|
What kind of evil is "causes harm to man, whether by bodily injury, by thwarting his natural desires, or by preventing the full development of his powers, either in the order of nature directly, or through the various social conditions under which mankind naturally exists?" |
Physical Evil |
|
|
What kind of evil is what we consider "bad" |
Physical evil |
|
|
What kind of evil is what we consider "Evil" or "sinful?" |
Moral evil |
|
|
A man breaks his arm in an accidental fall What kind of evil is this? |
Physical evil |
|
|
A girl cannot read because her father is a gambler and squandered her tuition money is what kind of evil? |
Moral evil |
|
|
What does it mean when "some evils are suffered, others Chosen?" |
No one really chooses Evil as such, rather it is seen as "the good that which attracts the will." Evil is somewhat a result of us choosing what will be "good" for us |
|
|
True or false, being a contingent being, we have a particular good? (Give example) |
True, like how we choose sleep instead of going to mass |
|
|
What is under serviceability of Particular Good? |
Ignorance |
|
|
What is under Ultimate end? |
Disordered Desire |
|
|
True or false, Judging morality of behaviors is easy? |
FALSE |
|
|
Differentiate Acts and Behaviors |
Acts - Discrete physical/mental operations Behaviors - Complexes of Object, Intention, and Circumstances |
|
|
Why is judging the morality of behaviors difficult? |
Plurality of moral traditions (religious and secular, etc.) and the option for Roman Catholic Magisterial Paradigm |
|
|
What are the "Sources of Morality"? |
Object, Intention, and Circumstance |
|
|
What is the object? |
The act, or what is being done (AKA means of behavior) |
|
|
What is the intention? |
The motivation or why it is being done |
|
|
What are the 2 points under intention? |
Finnis Operis or Natural end of act (e.g. Building a house to build) Finis Operantis or that to which the agent orders (e.g. to dwell in or to sell for profit) |
|
|
What is a circumstance? |
Other qualifying information or How is it being done (e.g. Who, when, where, with what, what degree, etc.) |
|
|
Moral Behavior depends on what? |
What we do (obj), why we do it (intention), and how we do it (circumstances) |
|
|
What does conformability to the objective moral order mean? |
Some objects NEVER glorify God or Ennoble us |
|
|
What is the criteria for the Goodness of a Behavior? |
All 3 must be good |
|
|
What is the meat loaf rule and why can't we apply it? |
"2 out of 3 ain't bad" but we need all three to be good. There is an effect of one good source, but also an effect of one evil source" rather "2 out of 3 ain't so good" |
|
|
Identify the 3 aspects in the following: To give money to a beggar outside the grocery store so he can buy food |
Obj: Give money Intention: So the beggar can buy food Circumstances: Outside the grocery store |
|
|
Who critiqued the sources of morality? |
B. Hoose and T. O'Connell |
|
|
What were the critiques of the sources of morality? |
Too Blunt, Too Abstract, Too Behavior-Oriented |
|
|
Why were the sources of morality said to be too blunt? |
It was developed for Seminary use and unsuited for describing moral complexity (e.g. difficulty in analyzing intention and circumstances) |
|
|
Why were the sources of morality said to be too abstract? |
Difficulty of analyzing sources in isolation |
|
|
Why were the sources of morality said to be too Behavior-Oriented? |
Difficulty of analyzing behaviors in isolation - Contingency of Individual Moral Choices - Role of Habituation apparently neglected |
|
|
True or False, trends in modern thought deny the existence of an objective moral order? |
True |
|
|
What is an example of a trend in modern society that denies existence of Objective Moral Order? |
Exaggeration of Freedom, since individual conscience determine standards of morality Minimization of freedom because of the influences of behavioral sciences |
|
|
Does the Roman Catholic Church teach us of an objective moral order? |
Yes as limits to moral sovereignty and as dependence on God's laws |
|
|
What are the two points of Intelligibility of God's Law? |
Natural Reason or the capacity for certain knowledge of God Divine Revelation or the relationship to Natural Reason |
|
|
Give the function and Purpose of God's Law |
Reality Adheres to an Objective Moral Order God's Law is not a Heteronomy but a Participated Theonomy |
|
|
What does it mean when Reality Adheres to an Objective Moral Order? |
There is a relationship of moral choices and natural fulfillment. God's Commandments are means to natural fulfillment |
|
|
What does it mean whenGod's Law is not a Heteronomy but a Participated Theonomy ? |
Vocation is seen to accept and apply God's law Obedience to God's law presupposes and augments our Freedom |
|
|
What are some critiques for intrinsically evil acts? |
There is an opposition of Nature and Culture |
|
|
What did JPII say about Intrinsically Evil Acts? |
Some deny the existence of universal immutable moral laws. It minimizes or distorts revealed truth. There is an over reliance on psychology, sociology. *Inordinate Emphasis on Intention and Circumstances |
|
|
What did Bernard Hoose Say about Intrinsically Evil Acts? |
No one seriously believes what JPII condemns, rather there is a necessity of referring to intentions and circumstances and the relationship of sources of morality |
|
|
In what way does JPII and Hoose agree? |
Some things should never be done but their argumentation differs |
|
|
What paradigm does JPII follow? |
Neo-Thomastic Paradigm |
|
|
What is in the Neo Thomastic Paradigm? (JPII) |
Object specifies moral behavior Moral Relevance of Intentions, circumstances Natural Reason and Divine Revelation command or forbid certain actions |
|
|
What does it mean when Object specifies moral behavior |
This kind and not that is defined or primarily because of what is done (act) and determines the suitability of behavior |
|
|
What does it mean when Moral Relevance of Intentions, circumstances under Neo-thomastic Paradigm? |
Qualifying the object without determining it, meaning it can negate the object's goodness, or increase/decrease the subjective merit/demerit *Intention and circumstances seem like just an afterthought |
|
|
In the Neo-Thomasian Paradigm, "Natural Reason and Divine Revelation command or forbid certain actions" means what? |
Positive Precepts oblige everyone, meaning application depends on intention and circumstance Negative Precepts oblige everyone, always and everywhere. Meaning application does not depend on intention and circumstance |
|
|
True or False, For JPII, God's Law forbits certain objects? |
True, he believed there are really things that should never be done. This implies separability of sources of morality and that object is the primary reference *emphasized obedience to divine positive law (like commandments) |
|
|
What do Revisionist Ethicists believe that God Forbids? |
Certain behaviors, implying the inseparability of sources of morality |
|
|
Do Revisionist Ethicists believe that circumspection (*i think this means inspecting circumstance) is needed in moral evaluation? |
Yes they do, yet can we ever really know all the morally relevant circumstances? |
|
|
T or F, Natural Reason is NOT emphasized in Moral Evaluation? |
False, it is emphasized as it plays a role in theological inquiry to help formulate norms and as a contingency to theological inquiry |
|
|
How do we define a behavior between JPII perspective and Revisionist Ethicists perspective? |
JPII: Murder is sinful because of the object (5th Commandment, murder contradicts good of a person, so no intention/circumstance can justify) RE: Murder is sinful by reason of all its sources. "to Kill" becomes the object in strict sense (war, self-defense.) and "to murder" had moral qualification |
|
|
How would the RE define murder? |
Object is to Kill to be more neutral to see the intention and circumstance Once qualified as actual murder, there is specific intentions and circumstances behind it Act of killing differs from act of murder |
|
|
What is object in a strict sense? |
Discrete physical or mental operation that is pre-moral (or no reference to intention and circumstance. JPII says this is his way) e.g. giving, copulating, cutting, speaking falsegood |
|
|
What is object in the general sense? |
Strict sense+Reference to intention or circumstance -Morally Qualified JPII seems to understand object this way e.g. almsgiving, adultery, surgery, perjury (Intent and circum. can qualify more e.g. Mastectomy vs. breast augmentation |
