Where Do Morals Come From?

[TotusTuusMaria]

Where do morals come from?

Are they derived from the Church or does the Church just promote/protect them?

[kafka]

the moral law is written into the will and intellect of human nature (as well as angelic nature) by God. By the very act of God creating persons giving them free will and reason is the promulgation of moral law. All people (indepedent of Revelation and the Church) have the ability to discover the truth of right from wrong. The entire moral law is accessible to free will and reason.

Divine Revelation clarifies the moral law since men are susceptible to the remnants of original sin and the influences of the world and the fallen angels. The Church as the guardian and protector of Revelation also clarifies and publicly teaches the moral law throughtout salvation past, present and future, often in reaction to errors of society and in light of ever growing refinements into the evolving collective human conciousness.

[Hassan]

[quote name='kafka' post='1780169' date='Feb 13 2009, 08:08 PM']The entire moral law is accessible to free will and reason.[/quote]


Is this like the Church's teaching on demonstrations of the existence of God? In that Catholics must just hold it as a matter of faith that the entire moral law is "accessible" (like discoverable?) even if no such argument exists at the moment as a rational demonstration?

[kafka]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1780202' date='Feb 13 2009, 07:34 PM']Is this like the Church's teaching on demonstrations of the existence of God? In that Catholics must just hold it as a matter of faith that the entire moral law is "accessible" (like discoverable?) even if no such argument exists at the moment as a rational demonstration?[/quote]
no it is a deeper than a rational argument, and it is so deep it could be called fundamental or original. One can demonstrate it (if I can put it this way) simply by being, or experiencing personhood, and not objectifying things in the form of concepts and deductions.

Even if there were no Church one could discover right from wrong. Even if there were no Church (or even a word God) one is still oriented in his deepest subjectiveness, the deepest origin of his being, toward an infinite horizon who we call God. Both simply by being, and then proceeding from that original deepest subjectiveness or personhood comes the formulation of concepts, reasons, deductions, arguments, demonstrations, etc. via our experience in the world.

I recommend you read Karl Rahner, just from seeing your posts I get a sense that you would benefit from that theologian. Especially, "Foundations of Christian Faith"

Edited February 14, 2009 by kafka

[Hassan]

[quote name='kafka' post='1780247' date='Feb 13 2009, 08:57 PM']no it is a deeper than a rational argument, and it is so deep it could be called fundamental or original. One can demonstrate it (if I can put it this way) simply by being, or experiencing personhood, and not objectifying things in the form of concepts and deductions.

Even if there were no Church one could discover right from wrong. Even if there were no Church (or even a word God) one is still oriented in his deepest subjectiveness, the deepest origin of his being, toward an infinite horizon who we call God. Both simply by being, and then proceeding from that original deepest subjectiveness or personhood comes the formulation of concepts, reasons, deductions, arguments, demonstrations, etc. via our experience in the world.[/quote]

ah, that's very interesting and makes sense, thanks

[quote]I recommend you read Karl Rahner, just from seeing your posts I get a sense that you would benefit from that theologian. Especially, "Foundations of Christian Faith"[/quote]

I actually read some (stress the "some" part ) of his volume set of "Theological Investigations" back in 11th grade. I was old enough to appreciate some of it like his writtings on origional sin which releived a lot of confusions I had but looking back I probably was not mature, intelectually or just personally, to really appreciate him (I just found it interesting you would recomend that considering my brief history with him). I'm setting aside some religious books to read over the summer and I'll definitly try to skim it some now and sit down and read it during my summer. If you don't mind me asking would you mind saying why you think it would help me?

[kafka]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1780307' date='Feb 13 2009, 08:49 PM']ah, that's very interesting and makes sense, thanks



I actually read some (stress the "some" part ) of his volume set of "Theological Investigations" back in 11th grade. I was old enough to appreciate some of it like his writtings on origional sin which releived a lot of confusions I had but looking back I probably was not mature, intelectually or just personally, to really appreciate him (I just found it interesting you would recomend that considering my brief history with him). I'm setting aside some religious books to read over the summer and I'll definitly try to skim it some now and sit down and read it during my summer. If you don't mind me asking would you mind saying why you think it would help me?[/quote]
hmm that is a difficult question to answer. You seem very intellectual and at the same time liberal, even speculative. These are good things, yet they should not be used improperly. Rahner was a collosal intellect, probably one of the greatest Catholic intellectuals ever, although he did err minorly here and there. I think you would benefit by his works especially "Foundations of Christian Faith" because it is a breathtaking intellectual and spiritual journey, starting at the very rawness of our own beings, and leading to Revelation, and Christ who is the culmination of Divine Revelation. I think you would also be in symphony with some of his ideas such as his "Anonymous Christian" ideas which are generally very close to Magisterial teaching. Perhaps his works would help lead you to becoming a Christian. His works have helped me out a lot, and I see you are an intellectual as am I.

Edited February 14, 2009 by kafka

[TotusTuusMaria]

Thank you kafka. This sounds like I remember. I have a theology book that explained all of this but I loaned it out... Makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

I want to remember this correctly, so is Human Positive Law the Church and the government which leads and protects the people? Would both of those be considered Human Positive Law?

What is the duty of the Human Positive Law in regards to morals?

[kafka]

[quote name='TotusTuusMaria' post='1780474' date='Feb 14 2009, 12:08 AM']Thank you kafka. This sounds like I remember. I have a theology book that explained all of this but I loaned it out... Makes a lot of sense. Thanks.

I want to remember this correctly, so is Human Positive Law the Church and the government which leads and protects the people? Would both of those be considered Human Positive Law?

What is the duty of the Human Positive Law in regards to morals?[/quote]
I'm sort of getting a sense of what you are getting at, yet not completely.

The Church, and the nations exercise law, yet these laws are temporal, and subject to error since mere humans formulate them. Yet at the same time it must be said that many laws of the Magisterium are guided in their formulation by the Spirit, yet still they are not infallible as the teaching of Faith and morals are-under the conditions of infallible teaching. Therefore the laws of the Church have limits. The laws of the Church are subject to the Gospel. The laws of the Church, may to a certain extent be reformed, and made new. The laws of the Church are not forever.

What is the duty of Human Positive Law in regards to morals?

Aquinas said it well:

"the natural law is nothing else than the rational creature's participation in the eternal law"

All human laws should be forged according to eternal law, or in other words the moral law God has written in the wills and intellects of men. Yet even this is not enough for there is Divine Revelation, there is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which transcends reason itself (though works together with it in a union). Therefore I would say (without a deep study of these questions) that the duty of men in formulating law is to formulate those laws in concordance with the Gospel of Jesus Christ, where Justice and Mercy kiss. To me that is really the only way of looking at law, and it is enough for God has given us the Old and New Testaments, Sacred Scripture (or in other words Jesus Christ speaking to us) in which we may draw from and judge and formulate the most perfect of all laws in justice, mercy which proceeds forth in good judgment.

I went into this a bit on my commentary on Psalm 71:
[url="http://greatcatholicmonarch.blogspot.com/2009/01/psalm-71-and-great-catholic-monarch.html"]http://greatcatholicmonarch.blogspot.com/2...ic-monarch.html[/url]

{71:2} Give your judgment, O God, to the king, and your justice to the king’s son, to judge your people with justice and your poor with judgment.

Judgment proceeds from the virtue of justice. It is a Divine mandate for a Christian king to administer justice, especially to his poor: the unborn, the sick and the elderly. The great monarch will be a wiser and holier judge than was Solomon in all his glory. . .

I hope I answered your question, if not no big deal. Just clarify your questions.

Edited February 14, 2009 by kafka