#Christian ethics

[troythecatfish]

[locustheologicus]

Ethical Frameworks and a Return to Casuistry.

At a recent workshop I received this decision-making tool from the Markkula Center which I found extremely helpful. It briefly shows the process that needs to be taken when someone has to make an ethical decision. The process is spelled out below.

The following link from the Markkula center has further resources on this.

Ethics is such a vitally tool for addressing difficult challenges. The workshop I attended was on the challenge of using AI in the social service sector but the night before I had another workshop on preparing our migrant communities for potentially draconian policy shifts that will dramatically impact their lives. In both cases we considered real case studies that presented moral dilemmas. I thought more about this ethical process in light of these two issues.

Case studies are an essential aspect of ethics. Moral principles have a very important role to play as well but as the authors Toulmin and Jonsen have written in their book “The Abuse of Casuistry,”

Moral knowledge is essential particular, so that sound resolutions of moral problems must always be rooted in a concrete understanding of specific cases and circumstances. (Toulmin/Jonsen, pg. 330)

In the video below we hear from a comedian/ethicist Michael Schur who explains how a particular ethical case formed a moral dilemma that shaped his ethical lens.

In this TED talk Michael Schur, the creator of the Netflix show “The Good Place,” shares his own ethical formation and the framework that he employed to discern the right action. In the midst of his presentation on the ethical dilemma that so moved him he shares that he was becoming “sick to my stomach” as he morally considered the results of his action. His own conscience, his moral intuition, was playing a key role in this dilemma. This intuition had him review ethical literature to evaluate further his action. At the conclusion of his talk he suggest that ethical cases, like the one he presents, can help shape good moral habits. Schur suggests that developing ethical frames of references will help us become better people. It will help us succeed at making better choices and reflecting on our own happiness and the greater good.

Becoming aware of the philosophical ideal of the moral good, accepted virtues for the development of our moral character, existing ethical frameworks, and moral decision-making processes, will grant us a deeper and richer perspective on who we are and how we can become better and people. To become a better person is a fundamental goal that all humans share and ethics is a tool to help shape our humanity.

Contemporary Catholic moral theology tends to focus more on moral principles rather than methodology. Focused on their concern for “intrinsically evil acts” the Church has periodically focused more on principles as moral absolutes where methods or probable moral positions are given less consideration with certain moral positions. This unfortunate development emerged as moral theology attempted to employ a geometric/mathematical approach to ethics with the assumption that ethical problems could be resolved with a rigorous application of moral absolutes.

But in the world of medical or social work ethics it is important to promote case studies and to perhaps bring back a moral system that promoted this form of moral theology. This is what the 13th - 17th century art of casuistry offered. Stephen Toulmin and Albert Jonsen explored this historical contribution to moral reason and address the contemporary need to bring back this branch of moral theology. The authors define their thesis in this way.

Practical moral reasoning today still fits the pattern of topical (or “rhetorical”) argumentation better than it does of formal (or “geometrical”) demonstration. (Toulmin/Jonsen, pg. 326)

Ethical case studies that address particular moral issues allow the ethical framework to respect the role of one’s conscience in discerning the moral dilemma that we each face. The idea of the primacy of conscience has always been defended by the Catholic Church, but more as an idea than as a practice. Toulmin/Jonsen believe that casuistry can help form a practice that allows us to develop our conscience.

In offering this position Toulmin/Jonsen remind us of the role of synderesis which is a component within the individual conscience based on the theory of natural law. It is defined by Aquinas as “a natural disposition concerned with the basic principles of behavior, which are the general principles of natural law.” The moral principles that our religious and educational institutions develop exist within our own conscience as a natural disposition that can grasp and discern their application within the ethical situations we each face.

Aquinas, then, reserves the word conscientia for “the application of general judgments of synderesis to particulars.” This application can be either prospective, in discovering what is to be done in a particular situation, or retrospective, in testing what is to be done in order to discern whether one acted rightly. (Toulmin/Jonsen, pg. 129)

Through the period that Toulmin/Jonsen call “high casuistry” (15th through the 17th Century) many theologians utilized this ethical method to evaluate unique issues that they had not faced before. Until the middle of the 17th century, when Pascal wrote his scathing work, The Pastoral Letters, casuistry enjoyed a preeminent moral authority that allowed moral theologians like Francisco de Vitoria to address unique and particular issues. Vitoria’s 16th century contribution would establish the framework for human rights language, international law, just war, and the ideals of the enlightenment. These cases emerged as casuist like Vitoria analyzed the situation of Europe as the Reformation took hold and the emergence of nationalism. He also evaluated the Spanish relationship with and obligation to the indigenous community in the midst of the American colonial situation. These contributions surfaced because Vitoria had the ability to consider probable ethical opinions on a range of issues that emerged during that time and we now take for granted. But we now face our own unique moral dilemmas and we require the same flexibility to respond to these ethical issues through a rhetorical approach that considers the best probable ethical opinion to our own case studies.

The Markkula Center, Michael Schur, and Toulmin/Jonsen, would all seem to suggest that the moral development of a person is best achieved by the use of ethical frameworks within particular case studies that present a real moral dilemma. You may not always get the right action or make the best ethical decision, but the more you employ and discern these ethical frameworks, the more you achieve a higher ethical standard, the more you become a better person and attain happiness.

One other point needs to be made. The casuist approach to ethics was both a communal and personal one. A contemporary concern may be that casuist may reinforce a subjective or situational approach to ethics that devalues objective principles to the point of being absolutely relativistic. Toulmin/Jonsen do not agree and Vitoria’s use of casuistry suggests that it was not used this way (beyond the controversies of the moral laxists that Pascal reproached).

For the casuists,… informed conscience might be intensely personal, but its primary concern was to place the individual agent’s decision into its larger context at the level of actual choice: namely, the moral dialogue and debate of a community. Conscience was “knowing together” (con-scientia). The dialogue and debate consisted in the critical application of paradigms to new circumstances, but those “paradigms” were the collective possession of people - priests, rabbis or common lawyers or moral theologians- who had the education, the opportunity, and the experience needed to reflect on the difficulties raised by new cases and to argue them through among themselves. (Toulmin/Jonsen, pg. 335)

As I approach the ethics of social ministry there will be many contemporary similarities that is see with how both medical and social work ethics utilize case studies to hone in their own ethical inquiries. In the case of Catholic social ministry I would like to suggest that the method of casuistry should be redeployed to help us develop an ethical approach befitting the social ministries and mission of the Church.

[thinkingonscripture]

The Value of Integrity

Integrity is the currency of a healthy relationship, but only among those who value it. It is the fruit of a morally upright heart that practices honesty, loyalty, and justice (Psa 15:1-5; Prov 19:1; 28:6; Mic 6:8). Without integrity, trust is compromised, communication suffers, and the stability of the relationship is jeopardized. Duplicity stands in stark contrast to integrity. While integrity…

[theexodvs]

To say that a virgin man "deserves" a virgin woman as a wife, even after he breaks the seventh commandment in ways other than premarital intercourse, is to treat women as carnival prizes.

This emphasis on women's sexual sin ahead of men's is part of a larger hamartiological autism that needs to be discarded by evangelicals.

[pastordin]

Commands of the King: Work and Vocation

Life Areas Application: Work and Vocation | Pastor Aamir Din Home | Media | Contact Life Areas Application: Work and Vocation “Whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, as working for the Lord, not for human masters, since you know that you will receive an inheritance from the Lord as a reward. It is the Lord Christ you are serving.” — Colossians 3:23-24 (NIV) Part III: Life Areas…

[liwayway0219]

i have nobody to share this to

[mindfulldsliving]

Cultural Perspectives on the Golden Rule: Empathy in Action

The Golden Rule is a powerful principle that resonates across cultures and religions, urging us to treat others as we wish to be treated. It's a simple yet profound guideline for living a life of empathy and kindness.

Interpreting The Golden Rule: Insights from 3 Nephi 14:12, Matthew 7:12, and Luke 6:31 Why has “The Golden Rule” resonated across centuries? It’s simple yet profound, urging us to treat others as we wish to be treated ourselves. This powerful idea finds a place in diverse teachings, including scriptures like 3 Nephi 14:12, Matthew 7:12, and Luke 6:31. As we explore these passages, we see a…

[biblepreacher]

War & Politics: Conquer Evil with Good

We are continuing our series answering the questions of "war & politics". In this post we talk about how to conquer evil with good, which is a crucial point in my framework. For this reason, this post is larger and deeper in scope than the others.

One of the most compelling axioms of our time is the saying “when good men do nothing, evil prevails.” When we look around and see what is being done to babies, how our children are being mutilated, and our society is becoming cruel, desperate, and corrupt, I think we yearn from the deepest recesses of our soul for justice. We look for answers that tell us what we can do about the evils we see…

[compassionmattersmost]

When Christianity Became the Empire: A Reflection on Faith, Power, and Deception

Throughout history, the story of Christianity has been one of profound transformation. From its humble beginnings as a faith centered on the teachings of Jesus—a man who preached love, forgiveness, and non-violence—Christianity evolved into a powerful institution, closely tied to the machinery of empire. This evolution raises important questions about the nature of faith, power, and the dangers…

[irishgop]

What we need is a cup of understanding, a barrel of love, and an ocean of patience.

St. Francis De Sales

[selfhelp2024]

Is AI Deceiving Christians? Unveiling the Truth Behind Technology and Faith:

In a world where artificial intelligence (AI) has woven itself into the fabric of daily life, from voice-activated assistants to complex algorithms guiding our choices, Christians face a pivotal question: Is AI deceiving us?

Read More HERE

[locustheologicus]

Francisco de Vitoria: A Moral Casuist who helped usher human rights and international law.

I recently shared some insights on the need to consider the contribution of casuistry. This is the thesis that authors Toulmin/Jonsen proposed in a book that I commented on in a recent post. In that post I mentioned how the 16th century casuists had developed the language for moral concept we now take for granted like human rights and international law. A casuist that was responsible for this initial development was Francisco de Vitoria, a Dominican friar and moral theologian who is considered the father of these concepts.

Vitoria was born in 1483 in the Basque region of Spain. He was dedicated to the study of Aquinas and the scholastics and he applied himself to moral casuistry. His academic contribution at the University of Salamanca during the 16th century raised what became known as the second scholasticism. The above video (which is in Spanish) and this link to an article by Dr. Alberto Ferreiro offers more information on the life and contribution of this great theologian/philosopher. Below I offer my own thoughts on his ethical contributions that continue to be relevant for us today.

In the video above the narrator tells us that as a theological student in the University of Paris he became aware of humanism, nominalism (the perspective developed by William of Ockham), and thomism which of course was the scholastic method that Aquinas further developed. The narrator suggests that it was the thomistic perspective of natural law that became his prefered philosophical perspective from which he applied his own metaphysical worldview. Vitoria applied the Christian natural law ethic to an optimistic view of global humanity. He was certainly a product of his culture, as you will note when you see his reference to the indigenous as barbarous an less civilized as the Spanish, but he also seemed to understand that Christian values transcend and even transform culture. Vitoria addressed many of the concrete issues of the time through these lens and as a result achieved some conceptual ideas that we accept today. This includes the idea of human rights and international law. Amaya Amell described Vitoria’s worldview in this way.

[Vitoria] believed that there existed a common human nature, a common humanity, among all people. Therefore, the law of nations was to be arrived at by a process of natural reasoning that all men shared, and a majority consensus would have the force of law even if not everyone was in agreement with it. Therefore law of nature was the source from which the rules of the law of nations were primarily derived, but at the same time, was separate from it. Natural law, as discussed before, is inherent in every person and therefore immediately evident to human reason and independent of human judgment, whereas the law of nature requires the intervention of human analysis and thought to determine whether a certain practice is just or not. (Amell, pg. 78)

As a casuist Vitoria did not so much make concrete positions on the issues of just war, human rights, and international law but instead he offered probable opinions regarding these ideas as they applied to the situation of European and ecclesial power, the emergence of nationalism, and the situation of the Americans including the rights of the indigenous. In this regard his critics rightfully point out that he offers opinions on these issues that at times contradict themselves. When addresing the situation on the indigenous in his relectio (academic reflection) De Indis Prior, he critiques the Spanish and ecclesial authorities for their illegitimate arguments in unjustly occupying the natives land. Yet, in the same relectio, he also offers legitimate arguments for their presence and the potential need to wage war. Vitoria's probable opinions create the language for Francisco Suarez, Hugo Grotius, and John Locke to develop their positions on these three concepts later on.

As I explained in an earlier post, the moral casuist explores concrete issues and addresses complicated moral perspectives related to those issues. There can be no doubt that Francisco de Vitoria had an optomistic view of the human family and this view was filtered by his appreciation for the natural law and the positive theological anthropology he had of the human condition in relation to sin and grace. As the Spanish community wrestles with the indigenous reality Vitoria explored the concept of rights and law between these two very different communities. His insights contributed to the issues of migration and free trade as we shall see.

Vitoria on how the Law of Nations justifies Migration and Free Trade:

One curious innovation he does offer is the notion of the law of nations which he believes is a universal idea based on the natural law. In one of his opinions legitimizing the Spanish presence in the Americas Vitoria suggests that "amity between men is a part of natural law, and it is against nature to shun the company of harmless men." He believed in a post-nationalistic age, an age of globalization, where harmless people had the right to travel, trade, and reside where they wish for opportunities, security or stability. In this defense he also posits the argument that a just war can be declared if nations harm, impede, or stop these migrants from enjoying these rights. This argument was considered for the situation of the Spanish traveling into the Americas (and of course many object to how Vitoria considers the idea of harmless people when he is every bit aware of the atrocity of Pizarro's decimation of the Incas in 1532) but it would be interesting to raise his thoughts on how this particular law of the nations should address the anti-immigrant situation we currently face. It may be helpful to see what Vitoria actually says here about this universal law of the nations.

Amongst all nations it is considered inhuman to treat strangers and travellers badly without some special cause, humane and dutiful to behave hospitably to strangers. This would not be the case if travellers were doing something evil by visiting foreign nations. Second, in the beginning of the world, when all things were held in common, everyone was allowed to visit and travel through any land he wished. This right was clearly not taken away by the division of property (diuisio rerum); it was never the intention of nations to prevent man's free mutual intercourse with one another by this division. (Vitoria, pg. 278)

The following excerpt from Vitoria is especially significant for the question of the rights and privileges of migrants who establish themselves in new communities. This case looks specifically at the presence of Spaniards in indigenous lands (which he unfortunately identifies as barbarians).

If children born in the Indies of a Spanish father wish to become citizens of that community, they cannot be barred from citizenship or from the advantages enjoyed by the native citizens born of parents domiciled in that community. The proof is that the law of nations (ius gentium) clearly defines a 'citizen' (ciues) as a man born in a community (civitas)... Indeed, if anyone were willing to take up domicile in one of these barbarian communities, for example because he had taken a wife there or for one of the other reasons by which denizens customarily acquire citizenship, it does not seem to me he could be prohibited from doing so, any more than other inhabitants. Consequently, it seems he would enjoy the same priveleges as the rest, at least as long as he accepted the same burdens as they. (Vitoria, pg. 281)

Vitoria's casuist opinions have had an impact on how the global community saw itself. Vitoria studied the natural law through an optomistic view of the global human family and this sets the pattern for how he develops the law of the nation. This is the interpretation that moral philosophers will use not only during the period of the nelightenment but even in the modern era. James Scott, a famed participant of the Versailles conference ending the First World War and establishing the League of Nations, for example, recognizes Vitoria's worldvies and applied it in the early 20th century. Scott identified from Vitoria moral social norms based on the natural law which, he believes, should dictate the universal laws that govern our global society. As Scott himself will say as he comments on Vitoria's worldview:

Here we have again natural law as the source of the law of nations, and the law of nations, thus concieved, creates both rights and duties, for the existence of the right clearly necessitates the existence of an obligation to protect its exercise. In a word, with the right there is implied the duty which is its appropriate sanction. (Scott, pg. 25)

Based on this worldview Scott raised Vitoria's insights in considering how international law should respond to the question of migration and free trade. After offering the position that Vitoria argues from natural law (which I cited above) Scott also offers the position of Vitoria as a moral theologian to emphasize how this position is consistent with divine law as well as natural law.

Thus it appears that from these few paragraphs, the right is established for all peoples to travel upon the high seas, common to all, and to visit and to settle in territories of other peoples, provided, to paraphrase Vitoria, that they do not "misbehave" when visiting foreign parts. Now ... We may grant that Vitoria's arguments as a man of law are unanswerable, but as a theologian and a moralist he was not content to rest his case on law alone. Therefore he now invokes first the New Testament and the St. Augustine to show that since "the Spaniards are the neighbors of the barbarians... they are bound to love their neighbors as themselves," and therefore, "they may not keep them away from their country without cause." But who are our neighbors? The answer is from St. Augustine's De Doctrina Christiana: "When it is said 'Love thy neighbor,' it is clear that every man is our neighbor." The meaning of this is that if all human beings are neighbors, all human beings have the right, which Vitoria has set forth to demonstrate, to visit and settle among any and all peoples of the known world. (Scott, pg. 21)

There is a consistent moral argument that Vitoria and Scott make in promoting the ideals of international law. Of course one can see that, as a Spaniard himself, Vitoria may be biased in defending the rights of a Spaniard but he does add an important qualifier that universalizes this moral maxim.

The right, however, is here, as elsewhere, equal, Vitoria immediately adding: "Neither may the native princes hinder their subjects from carrying on trade with the Spanish; nor, on the other hand, may the princes of Spain prevent commerce with the natives." (Scott, pg. 22)

Toulmin/Jonsen tells us that the inefficiency of casuistry is erroneously characterized by Pascal as being morally flippant and prone to laxism. There is some truth to this as I mentioned in a previous post, but it is incorrect. Strict moral absolutes ignores the complexities of particular situations and this does not help us address issues. Casuistry does not pretend to offer complete moral solutions but it does lead to ethical concepts that can be further developed by others.

Immigration and trade policies continue to be complicated and both these issues are at the center of American policy discussions with the upcoming administration. Will policies promoting deportation and tariffs stand up to the ethical positions Vitoria initiated and others further developed? These are the questions that we certainly need to consider, but fortunately we do not have to start from scratch. Contemporary casuists will need to build on what Vitoria and Scott initiated in the mid 16th and 20th centuries.

Casuists, like modern lawyers, take specific cases and pronounce probable opinions defending aspects of the social issue. Lawyers today act within the system of casuistry whereas moral theologians have a tendency to be more definitive in how they present their issue (although Fr. Keenan, SJ presents differently as I recently read from an article he wrote in America magazine). I would suggest that in general, Catholic social teaching continues the tradition of casuistry as well. Whereas the most recent encyclical on moral theology, Veritatis Splendor, continues to promote moral absolutes and deontological ethics social encyclicals including Fratelli Tutti are not dissimilar from the approach of casuistry.

What I would like to suggest is that we should again embrace the work of the casuists who initiated so much of our moral concepts. Instead of taking ideas like human rights and international law for granted and ceding their interpretation to secular liberalism or conservative originalism I think it would be good to liberate these ideas by placing them again with the ethical framework of natural law. Through this ethical lens we can produce universal norms that dialogues well with religious/theological arguments. Ecumenical and Interfaith discussions can be organized on these issues that bring a more active role with faith based communities who have always been on the forefront of community organizing.

Perhaps it is time to dust off the works of Francisco de Vitoria and others (Suarez, Molina, Las Casas, etc.) as we appreciate the origins of the concepts that we take for granted today. As Dr. Ferreiro says in the article linked above:

If ever there was time again to hear Francisco’s voice in the current chaotic wilderness that we are living in, it is now: Sancte Francisce, ora pro nobis.

[thinkingonscripture]

Be Wise as Serpents and Innocent as Doves

Jesus told His disciples, “I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and innocent as doves” (Matt 10:16). There are times when Christians will find themselves in the midst of a pack of wolves, which is a dangerous situation. When this happens, they should maintain purity in their intentions while being shrewd in their conduct to avoid unwarranted harm.[1] Doves are…

[tmarshconnors]

Does it scare you to think about what Satan is trying to do to your kids?

What are you doing to make sure he doesn’t? Are you teaching your children about God?

Are you setting an example for them showing them what faithfulness looks like? Do you take them to church and Bible class?

Do you talk to them about the lies and immorality that the devil has made normal?

Do you keep them from playing video games and watching shows that slip in things that will take them off course? Do you pray for them and over them?

Don’t think for one second that you can let up or slack off. Evil doesn’t.

[pastordin]

Commands of the King: Forgiveness and Reconciliation

Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Healing Through Christ’s Commands | Aamir and Carissa Din Home | Media | Contact Forgiveness and Reconciliation: Healing Through Christ’s Commands Published on November 27, 2024 Part II: Thematic Exploration of Commandments Forgiveness and Reconciliation Forgiveness and reconciliation are pivotal themes in Jesus’ teachings, underpinning the ethical and…

[biblebloodhound]

Saved for a Reason (Ephesians 2:1-10)

Humanity is spiritually hard-wired to do good in this world. 

At one time you were like a dead person because of the things you did wrong and your offenses against God. You used to live like people of this world. You followed the rule of a destructive spiritual power. This is the spirit of disobedience to God’s will that is now at work in persons whose lives are characterized by disobedience. At one time you were like those persons. All of you used to do…