MORAL THEOLOGY AT THE INTERSECTION OF RATIONAL

DIMENSION, SACRED DIMENTION AND CONSCIENCE DIMENSION

1. INTRODUCTION
According to Pope John Paul’s encyclical Veritatis Splendor, Moral Theology
is a science which accepts and examines Divine Revelation while at the same
time responding to the demands of human reason. Moral theology is a reflection
concerned with "morality", with the good and the evil of human acts and of the
person who performs them; in this sense it is accessible to all people1. From the
very definition, we understand Moral theology deals with every human act which
is done with reason and conscience under the light of divine revelation expressed
in the Sacred Scripture. It is a complex science that is not like mathematics which
can solve all the problems with standard formulas and methodology. It cannot be
reduced merely to right or wrong and good or bad. It is beyond overly simplistic
judgements. Do we have any answer book for all the complex moral problems in
the society? No. Can we judge any moral action only adhering to the
commandments found in the Scripture? No. Can we say that the Scripture is
irrelevant and base all our moral judgements to rationality? No. In spite of all the
laws and rationality, can any action be completely immoral to the very conscience
of the self? A right moral judgement come not exclusively from one of these
realms but by the integration of all these dimensions. Why these things bother us
very much? A true moral life is the greatest expression and witness to the
Christian faith. It is not just doing right things and avoiding wrong things but it is
in Christian discipleship that is more on following Jesus as a perfect example on
morality2. Bretzke adds,” If our ethics and moral theology are to be truly Christian
then every other norm, judgment and conclusion has to be subordinated to our
understanding of Jesus Christ and his gospel message”3.
MORAL METHODOLOGY
Complexity is very obvious in the moral judgments and therefore it has to be
studied under a guiding model or paradigm. A paradigm is not the whole of
reality, but rather a good model that helps to get our minds around the reality4. In
the study of cosmology, we know the paradigm shift that has happened after the
justification of heliocentric theory over geocentric theory. For almost fifteen
centuries, gravitation is explained by Newtonian Mechanics and after the
invention of Time-Space model by Einstein everything is being explained in a
new paradigm. Paradigm or model is helpful to explain the reality and no
paradigm or model exhausts all there to say about the nature of morality. Cardinal

1
JOHN PAUL II, Veritatis splendor, 29.
2
Cfr. BRETZKE J, A Morally complex world: engaging contemporary moral theology, 16.
3
Cfr. Ibid., 34.
4
Cfr. Ibid., 16.
Avery Dulles is a famous Jesuit theologian who used to explain Church in various
models such as institution, mystical body, community of Christ’ disciples, etc.
but none can fully explain the complex reality of the Church. In moral theology,
we deal with complex terms like conscience, moral norms, sin, natural law and
goodness, we need a model or paradigm to explain what is good or bad according
to some particular model or paradigm. No model can comprehend everything that
concerns morality5.
FOUR SECTORS OF MORAL THEOLOGY: SACRED TEXTS,
TRADITION, HUMAN EXPERIENCE AND NORMATIVELY HUMAN
A well-known American Protestant ethician James Gustafson propose a hybrid
model that well accommodates all the important sectors of the Christian moral
judgements. They are Sacred texts, Tradition, Human experience and normatively
human. These four sectors do not function separately but with the overlapping of
each other. Furthermore, they can be aligned in two principal axes, one is Sacred
Claim axis which consists Scripture and Tradition and rational claim axis which
consists Normatively Human and Human experience.
Sacred Sector
The Scripture is the revelation of God for the Christian community and it is the
foundational source of the Christian faith. With regard to the moral theology, we
cannot take every word and sentence literally as the moral norm but it defines the
content and boundaries. The use of language is truly different from the language
in other sectors. It is difficult to translate a particular word with the exactly same
meaning with another word in another language. Though ‘Sacred’ does not mean
unquestionably absolute, it is canonical and normative6.
Tradition Sector
Tradition is viewed as an important way in which the revelation contained in
the Scripture could be amplified and applied to successive generations of the
Church7. It is termed as the wisdom of Christian community. Tradition is also
termed as foundational gift, content and mode by which the content is made
available to successive generations of believers. It is also not an absolute for all
times but needs to be re-read and re-interpreted.
Human Experience Sector
It is a very difficult sector that creates suspicion and reluctance to the
theologians. Experiences of human person is an important moral source and the

5
Cfr. Ibid., 19.
6
Cfr. Ibid., 22.
7
Cfr. Ibid., 23.
experiences can be affective, emotional and intuitive. It is not just about self-
awareness or subjectivity but it connects with every human community.
Normatively Human Sector
Rational reflection on the normatively Human sector is basically the reflection
of the human experience and come to the conclusion that would foster the human
flourishing. It deals with the ethics and philosophy and defines what is to be a
human person. We agree on the objective moral order which is grounded in God’s
providence and comes human experience. Our moral conclusion comes out of the
reflection on our human experience and that is normatively human.
TWO PARADIGMS: PHYSICALIST AND PERSONALIST
Paradigms and models help us to comprehend the totality of the morality and
moral life. Here we see two models always in contrast with each other. Physicalist
paradigm ruled moral theologies for many centuries and it is based on Neo-
Scholasticism. It portrays moral world and human nature as a ‘given essence’ and
this is basically static and unchangeable. It is more a classicist view which focuses
on the abstract nature of the human person and he or she should follow his or her
nature which is same for all people, in all times and in all situations. Therefore,
any action against this abstract human nature is termed as immoral without
considering any intensions and circumstances. It is more objective in nature.
On the contrary, Louis Janssens proposes a personalist paradigm which
concerns on the concrete human person and his relations with circumstances and
personal history. It says human nature cannot be abstracted in arbitrary but should
be concrete, historical, individual and unique person. He highlights eight key
aspects which are fundamental to human person, namely subject, embodied
subject, part of the material world, inter-relational, an interdependent social
being, historical, equal and unique and called to know and worship God. All these
factors to be considered to assess something as normatively human.
RATIONAL DIMENSION: THE NATURAL LAW AND MORAL NORMS
NATURAL LAW BLUEPRINT AND SIX CLAIMS
Natural law is something which is grounded in certain basic human nature that
calls us to live ethically in relation to some sort of an objective moral order8. On
the one hand, it is very difficult to comprehend Natural law that is understood in
totality at any point in history. Therefore, it is better to formulate theories on
natural law that can be revised, renewed and even rejected as a model or
paradigm. It is very much analogous to the blueprint or a skeleton of any
construction which includes all the general, essential and important features of
the building and it would not deal with any minute deals about the building.
8
Cfr. Ibid., 47.
Theories of natural law based on two fundamental premises, they are Ontological
claim and Epistemological claim. Ontological claim states that there is an
objective moral order and that there is certain basic rightness and wrongness of
moral standards in the world. It is not constructed by any theory or ideology of
people but in our basic human nature which surpasses all time and age. This
common human nature is shared by all human beings irrespective of time. The
second basic premise in grounded on the first one, Epistemological claim states
that the objective moral order can be known by human beings through the faculty
of reason. From the first two claims comes the third claim, Normable claim. The
objective moral law which is known by the reason should be made as moral norms
that would foster human flourishing in a practical way. It is a movement from
perception to reflection and action. The next claim will be normative claim which
binds the moral norms to us, irrespective of our particular inclinations and desires.
It is not that some objective moral law exists that we know and it has become the
norm and that moral norm is binding on us. This would make us to move to the
final two claims, universalizable and universal claim. The moral norm deduced
is universalizable. It could be applied to all peoples, all times and places. A very
good example for this is the Declaration of Independence of United States: “We
hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”9. According to this universalizable
claim, all the people in the country have the right to Life, dignity and Freedom.
Finally, universal claim states that there are moral absolutes, norms that are not
merely counsels or ideals to stive towards. It is truly universal, applies to all
people, regardless of any other factors such as historical context, individual and
collective circumstances, etc. However, can anything be always absolute? It is
much debatable from the physicalist and personalist paradigms.
THOMAS AQUINAS’ SPECULATIVE AND PRACTICAL REASON
Thomas Aquinas proposed two types of human reason that would be best to
have moral response in any given situation. First one is speculative reason which
deals with the evaluation of abstract truths. For example, three sides of any
polygon with the sum of the angles between them is 180 degrees, then it is called
triangle. It is universally and necessarily true. In that way, Objective moral truth
is universal in nature. But this universal general truth cannot give the concrete
answer for all the ethical dilemmas. Therefore, another type of reason, Practical
reason comes into play. Thomas calls this as Contingent matters which are
changeable if we go into the matters in detail. Aquinas quotes,
“Since the speculative reason is busied chiefly with the necessary things, which
cannot be otherwise than they are, its proper conclusions, like the universal
principles, contain the truth without fail. The practical reason, on the other hand, is
9
Cfr. Ibid., 55.
 busied with contingent matters, about which human actions are concerned and
consequently although there is necessity in the general principles, the more we
descend to matters of detail, the more frequently we encounter defects”10.
LEVELS OF MORAL NORMS
Bretzke proposes three levels of Moral norms, they are Universal Precepts,
Middle Axioms and Concrete Material Norms. Universal Precepts are universally
true that by nature it is good which is to be done and fostered and by nature it is
evil which is to be avoided or minimized. For example, when we take the maxim,
‘drive safely’, it would certainly foster common good for all but that would not
practically useful to regulate the traffic. Therefore, we need a next level called,
Middle Axioms placed between Universal Precepts and More concrete material
norms. It means that the principle of middle axiom was generally true but not
absolutely true. Thomas Aquinas uses the term ut in pluribus, which means the
principle holds true in most cases but not all. Here is where practical reason binds
us to the particular situation. Practically, obeying the speed limit would be the
middle axiom which would foster safe driving. However, at the time of high
medical emergency, middle axiom of following the norm of speed limit would
work? Certainly not. Even the best devised traffic laws cannot foresee every
possible circumstances. We should be certainly prudent in case of emergency,
that is the last level of moral norm, concrete material norms. Thomas uses the
word, epikeia, which means fitting, suitable or reasonable. It is a virtue to better
use our human reason and make the concrete law more perfect11.
MORAL NORMS TO MORAL ACTIONS
According to the Roman Catholic moral theology, it always turns towards
fontes moralitatis or sources of morality. Three aspects of moral acts are 1. Finis
operis (goal or purpose or end of an action) 2. Finis operantis (goal or end or
intension of the person doing the action) 3. Circumstances. During the period of
Peter Lombard and Bernard, Moral actions were only considered from the
perspective of a physicalist paradigm that objective moral order exists and an
action could be considered morally right or wrong according to the end of action
(finis operis). But Thomas contradicted them by saying the moral rightness and
wrongness is based on the intension of the agent doing the action (finis operantis).
He called it human acts which is a voluntary and willed action. If there is will,
the intension of the agent determines the end or object of the action. It is difficult
to determine any moral action good or bad without knowing the intension of the
agent and the circumstances of the action performed12.

10
Ibid., 61.
11
Cfr. Ibid., 64.
12
Cfr. Ibid., 65-68.
SACRED DIMENSION: SCRIPTURE AND TRADITION
According to the Faith-Ethic school, Bible is an important source of moral
teaching that is absolutely necessary to aid human reason. They believe that we,
Christians would not get a complete and absolute understanding of the moral
norms through reason alone. Human reason should be illuminated by faith and
without doubt, the Sacred Scripture is the foundational and fundamental source
of our Christian faith. Faith has an important role to play in our moral lives. If we
believe that Jesus is messiah then that belief has a sacred claim on our moral lives.
The Christian moral life is to be focused on the Jesus Christ the Messiah and also
on his teachings in the Gospel. Though the Bible is the definitive revelation of
God for us, we do not find the term, ‘morality’ in the Scripture. We have to look
for an overall moral vision than to go for a detailed ethical norm to guide our
lives. For example, Jesus says, ‘If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and
throw it away’, can we take this verse literally and mutilate our organs? Certainly,
no because what claims on us is the overall moral vision of the Bible, Jesus and
the Gospel not a particular verse or passage. Context, spiritual background,
traditional and cultural values of the community must be taken care during the
interpretation of the words of Jesus13.
While integrating the natural moral law and the Scripture, there are ample
number of tensions to integrate each other. It is not very easy and therefore, we
find traditional differences between protestant and Catholic positions on natural
reason and sin for centuries. Even inside the Catholic fold, we find two positions
as ‘Faith Ethics School’ and ‘Moral Autonomy School’. Moral theologians like
Bruno Schuller represent a minimalist position with regard to the importance of
Scripture in our moral lives but others like Karl Barth argue for a maximalist
position. Karl Barth’s argument would be like ‘Divine Command Ethics’ and
therefore he would ask, ‘What is commanded of us by God?’. The Scripture is
the direct divine revelation by God to the human person which calls to
obedience14.
A MULTI-STRAND DOUBLE HELIX MODEL
When we try to interpret the Scripture for deriving meaning for our moral life,
the text speaks to the reader different ways in different periods of time. This
hermeneutics goes on like a circle and there is no way to get out of this circle. To
avoid the problem of hermeneutic circle, Bretzke proposes a double helix model
to explain the dynamics of Scripture and ethics in our Christian moral life. One
helix symbolizes the individual’s life experience and community traditions and
the other helix is the Scriptural texts in various forms and genres. At times, some
verses of the Bible seem to us very relevant and close but it may be very distant

13
Cfr. Ibid., 81.
14
Cfr. Ibid., 83-90.
and different at other time. It means that we are also changing time to time and
the interpretation also grows and develops along the time line15.
CORE, CONTEXT AND COHERENCE FOR USING SCRIPTURE IN
ETHICS
When we take each and every word of the Scripture literally and condemn
others for not being faithful to the word of God, it will help nobody seriously.
Bretzke proposes three C’s to properly respond to the ethical challenges posed to
the Scriptures. First of all, we have to pay attention to the core meaning of the
biblical texts. The core meaning is the revelation of God in the person of Jesus
Christ. Secondly, we have to know the context in which they were written. The
Scripture in not self-evident, self-translating or self-interpreting but it has to be
read, analyzed and interpreted. Thirdly, it should exhibit coherence with the rest
of the Scripture and whole of the tradition. This is where the biblical text is
applied well in coherence with the natural law and ethics. The Scripture is not
intentionally written as a rule book or a practical guide to moral life. Proper
attention to the above mentioned three C’s would help us see how God speaks to
us through Scriptures and other forms.
CONSCIENCE DIMENSION
The primary metaphor used by the Church for conscience is the sanctuary of
the human person after Vatican II. All the other four factors and two main axes
of moral theology intersect at the core of the conscience of the human person.
‘Follow your formed and informed conscience’ may be the final word before
taking any moral decision because it a holy and sacred place where the individual
meets God. Gaudium et spes speaks nicely on the term conscience,
‘Deep within his conscience man discovers a law which he has not laid upon
himself but which he must obey. Its voice, ever calling him to love and to do what is
good and to avoid evil. For man has in his heart a law inscribed by God. His dignity
lies in observing this law, and by it he will be judged. His conscience is man’s most
secret core, and his sanctuary (Gaudium et spes, 16)’16.

The main feature of moral autonomy is the sanctity of conscience and therefore
obedient to the moral voice is the locus of all moral goodness and badness. If the
conscience is the ultimate authority to be obeyed then it is well and good but if it
is not then there should be some other authority outside of us. If the outside
authority conflict with the conscience of our heart, we would be faced with
dilemmas. For example, Grisez says, ‘for her members, the Catholic Church is
the supreme moral authority under God’. It is because God teaches in and through

15
Cfr. Ibid., 93-98.
16
VATICAN COUNCIL II, Gaudium et spes, 16, EnchVat 1, 1350.
the church. But when the Pope or Bishop go wrong with a moral decision, whom
to obey, the Pope or the conscience? It is a tough question.
Even after knowing about the formed, informed, poorly formed conscience, the
Catechism of the Catholic Church states emphatically that no one must be forced
to act contrary to his or her conscience, to deliberately act against one’s
conscience would be condemning oneself’17. This shows the primacy of
conscience in the moral decisions above all rationality and authority.
CONSCIENCE IN MORALIST SCHOOL OF THOUGHT
From the manualist and scholastic tradition, Conscience is termed as a faculty
to do some action. Conscience is the judgement made by an individual concerning
the morality of the actions. There are two kinds of judgments in conscience, one
is the rightness and wrongness of the moral act in itself, primarily it refers to the
objective nature. Secondly, it is about the judgment about the position of the act,
this is more on the subjective judgement of the moral agent. This distinction is
important because there would be some actions which are objectively wrong or
bad but the subject or agent judges it right and good from him viewpoint. We
might have heard like this, I thought that it is right to my conscience and I did it.
The danger is, there is a possibility that the actions which are right and good
subjectively to the agent will be morally wrong in an objective manner. For
example, X and Y are thick friends, X prepared well for the exams but he was not
well before the day of the exams and the grades are very essential for the
promotion. Therefore, Y appears on behalf of X for the exam. Y is reasoning out
that the action is right because it is done to show his friendship towards X. His
judgement of the action is right but appearing in the exams for another person is
cheating and objectively wrong. We call the conscience of Y is erroneous
conscience and the related terms like vincible and invincible ignorance. Y does
not have the intension to fool the educational system but he was doing it out of
ignorance to the objective moral order. Manualists hold that through the sincere
efforts of the individual, they can overcome the ignorance and they are called
vincible and invincible otherwise18.
The problem of Certain but erroneous conscience for good people is that they
rationalize all the actions and come up with some ‘reasons’ for their desired
actions. Sometimes, we trick or deceive ourselves by saying that we followed our
conscience. Here comes the external authority, like the teachings of the Church
play a decisive role. Because we are not fully trained to use our conscience to
take better moral decisions, we open our hearts and minds to the authority of the
Church. However about invincible ignorance, Pope John Paul II says, ‘an
ignorance of which the subject is not aware and which he is unable to overcome

17
Cfr. Ibid., 115.
18
Cfr. Ibid., 116-125.
by himself’19. We understand that there is a reciprocal relationship between the
objective and subjective poles of human conscience that exists primarily with the
human person. This conscience has the social dimension also which is nurtured
by our cultural upbringing. Bretzke says, ‘Cultural modality will play a critical
role in how conscience works in every individual, since each and every person is
encultured into a particular culture’. Every culture has its own values and
principles. A person who was born and brought up in a violent environment like
mafia would not even feel that murder is morally bad. Probably quite a number
of people growing in that ambience would have the similar feeling about morality.
We may call this as cultural invincible ignorance. Every culture would have this
kind of ignorance such as racism, slavery, child labor, etc. Some centuries before,
slavery was widely accepted all over the world and in 1854, it was widely though
but not universally condemned and in 1954, it was universally condemned. It took
years together to change the cultural invincible ignorance in our times. However,
we as individuals and communities can take necessary efforts to grow in moral
wisdom20.
CONCLUSION
In the language of moral theology, one-size-fits-all will never hold true because
the complexity of moral problems is different in every case. There is no book of
solutions to any moral problems. The rational axis moves along the path of human
experience and rational reflection on normatively human. On the other hand,
Sacred axis moves along the Scripture and Tradition. It is in the core or sanctuary
of the conscience; both the sacred axis and rational axis intersect. Polarization of
one sector or axis will certainly make the other quadrants weak and certainly we
will not arrive at a morally right decision. As a human person, we all share the
basic human nature to foster good and avoid evil irrespective of our culture,
religion, region, race, etc. This is universal objective moral law that applies to
whole humanity. However, as Christians, it is not only the Natural law out there
but also our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, who is the definitive revelation of
God who is the great model of our moral life. Through the Tradition, the teachings
of Jesus Christ and the authentic moral life of the Christian communities is passed
over to generations. The Magisterium of the Church authentically interprets both
the Scripture and natural law and continues to accompany and challenge the
faithful in order to lead authentic moral lives. The law is written on the heart and
therefore primacy of conscience becomes very significant. Following our
conscience is very essential and at the same time, we have to take efforts
constantly to grow in moral wisdom.

19
Cfr. Ibid., 122.
20
Cfr. Ibid., 133-138.
 Bibliography
BRETZKE, J., A morally complex world: engaging contemporary moral theology,
Liturgical Press, Minnesota 2004.

JOHN PAUL II, Encyclical Letter Veritatis Splendor (6 August 1993), Bookshop
Editice Vaticana, Vatican City 201714.

VATICAN COUNCIL II, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Contemporary World
Gaudium et spes (December 7, 1965), in EnchVat, Vol. 1 Document of the Second Vatican
Council (1962-1965). Official text and English translation, EDB, Brescia 199716.