17 PHL 5 / CHRISTIAN ETHICS Only Teacher: Susan Ong UNIT II.

THE HUMAN PERSON ADEQUATELY CONSIDERED THE HUMAN PERSON and MORAL RESPONSIBILITY I. Key Concepts / Topics 1. The Human Person Adequately Considered The Human Person as Body, Soul and Spirit Sexual Being Person-in-Relationship Historical Personal and Corporate Image of God Ordained to God Worker and Artist Celebrator Human Person and Nature 2. The Human Person as Moral and Moral Responsibility Freedom Freedom of Self-Determination Levels of Freedom Fundamental Option Freedom from and Freedom for Obstacles to Freedom Knowledge Conceptual Knowledge Evaluative Knowledge Obstacles to knowledge II. Objectives At the end of the chapter, the students are expected to: 1. know and understand the holistic Christian understanding of the human person; 2. understand and appreciate ourselves and others; 3. know and understand the various factors that affect moral decisionmaking and action; 4. understand and appreciate the human person as moral and responsible III. Discussion For Private Use

18

The Human Person Adequately Considered (HPAC) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Body, Soul and Spirit Sexual Being Male and Female Person-in-Relationship / Relational Being Historical both Personal and Corporate Image of God Ordained to God Worker and Artist Celebrator Human Person and Nature

The Human Person as Moral and Moral Responsibility Freedom Why can we say we are free? There are many possible responses to this question. One response would be in a negative manner; we are free, because we can act in an arbitrary way and because we can do what we want to do, even thought we know that such will be destructive to lives of people around us. If we assert that this is what freedom is, then we can hardly consider it to be a value at all. Positively, we can say that we are free because we can discover a call which summons as to be real persons, and because we have within us the power to respond to that call. We are likewise free because we have the power to create ourselves. We are free because we can create valuable and authentic selves out of the given raw materials (like genetics and social-cultural environment) oftentimes given to us without us wanting them. In a more paradoxical manner, we can also say we are free because we have the power to do what we ought. Freedom is so central / important to moral life that without it we cannot properly speak of being moral persons at all. Morality pertains to those areas of our lives where freedom is possible and enables us to actualize our potential as the image of God. Promoting freedom is at the same promoting the possibility for moral life. Only in freedom can man direct himself towards goodness. Our contemporaries make much of this freedom and pursue it eagerly; and rightly to be sure. Often, however, they foster it perversely as a license for doing for whatever pleases them, even if it is evil. For its part, authentic freedom is an exceptional sign of the divine image within man. For God has willed that man remain under the control of his own decisions, so that he can seek his Creator spontaneously, and some freely to utter and blissful perfection through loyalty to Him. Hence, mans dignity demands that he act accordingly to a knowing and

19 free choice that is personally motivated and prompted from within and not under blind internal impulse nor by mere external pressure. Man achieves such dignity when emancipating himself from all captivity to passion, he pursues his goal in a spontaneous choice of what is good and procure for himself through effective and skillful action and seek appropriate help to achieve such goals. Since mans freedom has been damaged by sin, only by the aid of Gods grace can he bring such relationship with God into full flower. Before the judgment seat of God each man must render an account of his own life, whether he has done good or evil. (GS 17). The spontaneous response to the question what is being free means? is this: a person is free when he is able to do whatever he wishes without being hindered by an exterior constraint and thus enjoys complete independence. The opposite of freedom would therefore be the dependence of our will upon the will of another. But does man always know what he wants? Can he do everything he wants? Is closing in on oneself and cutting oneself off from the will of others in conformity with the nature of man? Often the desire of a particular moment is not what a person really wants. And in one and the same person there can exists contradictory wishes. But above all man comes up against the limits of his own nature; his desires are greater than his abilities. Thus the obstacle which opposes his will does not always come from the outside, from the limits of his own being. This is why, under the pain of destroying himself, man must learn to harmonize his will with his nature (LC 25). But it is so easy to confuse human freedom with simply doing what we want. Authentic freedom is not the right to say and do anything, but to do the good (CCC 1740). It is not my own individual private possession, but a shared freedom with others in community. It is not found in prejudice, deceit, or ignorance, but in truth as both the condition for authentic freedom and a warning against every kind of illusory freedom, every superficial unilateral freedom, every freedom that fails to enter into the whole truth about the human person and the world. (RH 12)1 Lovers of true freedom are those who come to decisions on their own judgment and in the light of truth, and govern their activities with a sense of responsibility, striving after what is true and right (DH 8).2 The pillars of this freedom are the truth about Jesus the Savior, the truth about the Church, and the truth about the human person and his/her dignity. (ITL XI, 5)3 These teachings (of the Church) points to two important dimension of freedom namely: 1) authentic freedom is based or founded on the truth about Jesus, the Church and the human person, and 2) authentic freedom is always a shared freedom with others in community. Freedom of Self-Determination In coming to self-awareness, there are some factors we have to recognize or accept which could be limiting conditions to who can become and to what is
1 2

Redemptor Hominis, John Paul II, 1979. Dignitatis Humanae, Vatican II Declarattion on Religious Freedom, 1965. 3 Instruction on Theology of Liberation issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1984.

20 possible for us to achieve. Consider for example, the influence of genetics and social-cultural conditioning to which we are all subject. Our genetic inheritance is unalterable or cannot be changed; although we may enhance what is given to us genetic or hereditary components. But heredity does not predetermine specifically what we will do or who we will become. Our freedom can be exercised across a broad spectrum of possibilities and is subject to environmental influences. We must provide for ourselves ways within the limits of these potentials and the forces of social-cultural conditions which shape our worldview and influence not only the way we interpret experience but even the kinds of experiences we have. The frequently given advice Be yourself is not simply permission to turn in on oneself, but it is, instead, an encouragement to express oneself within ones own limitations and according to ones own predispositions. Freedom necessarily acts out within the given conditions of heredity and environment. To become the person we ought to become is so important in our lives and this we can attain through the exercise of freedom. However, in the process of self-determination there are some factors (like genetics and socio-cultural environments) we have to consider or accept the limitations to our selfactualization / realization. For sure we cannot change our genes and the sociocultural environment we are born into. Heredity does not predetermine specifically what we will do and who we will become. Our freedom can be exercised across broad spectrum of genetic possibilities and environmental influences. For example, some Filipinos who made it Hollywood and Europe as artists or in sports, or recognition of their contribution to society (like Efren Penaflorida) all theyve have done are part of the exercise of their freedom of self-determination. In other words, their being Filipinos (genetic) and coming from a say poor country or middle class family are not obstacles to their becoming this or that type of persons as expressed in some of their accomplishments. One of the dangers in facing these limitations (genetic and socio-cultural environment) is we might succumb to determinism an attempt to escape from freedom by claiming that we are forced to be who we are and to do what we do by heredity and environment. Then we do not claim responsibility for anything we do. In fact, by refraining to accept the freedom which is ours, we show that we are afraid to accept responsibility. One of the tasks of human life is to achieve freedom in those areas where we are not yet free (e.g. if one at the moment is obsessed with hatred and revenge to a particular person or group, he or she is not free at all to see or appreciate the other person or to see or appreciate the goodness of the other person). Therefore, the primary goal of moral education is to free people from becoming directed by their genetic components / constituents or by the changeable limits of some external authority (It is to free us to live well within limits). Freedom enables us to integrate the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune into our lives so that we might grow toward wholeness and live in peace. This involves making what happens to us part of who we are. Turning necessity

21 into a virtue is one of the signs of a strong moral character, and it is an expression of our capacity for self-determination. The freedom to decide about and to make someone of oneself brings us to what the theologians call basic or core freedom. Basic freedom is directed toward a loving relationship with God, the ultimate end/goal of our lives. But since we experience God in a mediated ways, we ultimately establish our relationships with God in and through the way we relate to all things. For this reason basic freedom of self determination before God is always lived out in the particular choices we make through life. But not every choice we make involves us at the deepest levels of our being. Let us have a glimpse of the different levels of freedom. Levels of Freedom4 The following analysis of human freedom is a simplified picture of what is involved. I say, simplified and I am aware that over simplification can present a false picture. However, this descriptive analysis is intended to clarify some of the dynamics of freedom so as to help us appreciate how freedom works. For each of us there are different levels and degrees of decision-making. As we are all aware, some decisions are more important than others and call for greater thought, discernment and courage. Basically there are three levels of freedom. a) Level of Arbitrary Choice Perhaps the best way to explain this level of arbitrary choice is to imagine someone shopping at a supermarket. On the shelves there is a wide variety of products, different brands of scented soap for example, and the shopper pauses to select one. A choice has to be made but it is really of no great importance whether one buys Safeguard, or Papaya or Palmolive, which are more or less of equal value, except perhaps for the price. Advertisers, however, are constantly urging us to choose the one with the difference and sometimes manage to convince us that we have a discriminating taste when we choose their product. In fact consumerism, which is bred and driven by advertising, wants to believe that we are exercising a high degree of freedom in the market place and hence feel good about ourselves. But at this level of arbitrary choice, i.e. at the level where it doesnt really make much difference, the degree of human freedom exercised is minimal. b) Level of Free Will A second, one in which responsibility for our action is clearer, is when we have to make the choice between right and wrong. This is a more serious decision than that of arbitrary choice and entails greater degree of freedom. It is now a matter for ones conscience, which demands that a concrete moral choice must be made. It is the exercise of what is called free will. In choosing what our conscience tells us as wrong, are we really exercising our freedom? Knowing that
4

McKeating, Colm SSC. 2002. Season of Grace. Quezon City, Claretian Publications. Pp. 21-24.

22 what we deliberately choose is wrong weakens the will and erodes our moral character. It eventually leads to slavish behavior and the loss of freedom. Conscience which is the voice of God within us, will always insist that we choose the morally good. To go against ones conscience is to undermine ones integrity and damage ones inner freedom. Hence, human freedom should really be defined as the power or capacity to choose the good and nothing else. The liberal view of having a choice between right and wrong may respect individual human rights (and this includes making mistakes) but does not advance our understanding of what is the human good. It is by standing for what is morally right that we grow in freedom. c) Level of Inner Freedom or Liberty of Spirit There is still a third level of freedom of what may be called inner liberty of spirit. It resides in the innermost depths of the human heart. Such freedom is based on the profound self-knowledge and awareness of the pressures, desires, and fears as well as the prejudices that we all have. Modern depth psychology has u uncovered the world of the unconscious; the world of the unconscious; the world of dark and hidden drives which shape our thoughts and actions. It has revealed the pattern of activity within the human psyche that obstructs or limits our freedom. With the help of this new knowledge we can come to an acceptance of what and who we are and enjoy inner peace and freedom. Otherwise, nonacceptance of self will only lead to internal conflict and compulsive behavior. In this respect it is worth noting that human motivations are so complex that we should never judge another person. After all, we know so little about ourselves and why we behave in this way or that way; we know even less about others and what is going on inside them. But this is the arena where true freedom is to be sought and attained. This level is much deeper than arbitrary choice or free will; it is the level where self-determination takes place. And now, we may ask ourselves what degree of freedom do we really have? Our freedom of spirit can be measured by our capacity for openness to the future and letting go of what we are now possessively attached to. With this mind, the moment of death may be seen ideally as the moment of truth when we become totally free agents. All our decisions in life are partial and provisional and are often marked by compromise. We are constantly weighing the pros and cons and living under the constraints of one kind or another. But the acceptance of death provides us with a new horizon of freedom. Our whole life is laid out before God and we are released from pressures that inhibit our free internal acts. The historical and the contingent now give way to a stance in which we see things under the aspect of eternity. As we get older and hopefully wiser we move towards that day when in perfect freedom and trust we hand over our spirit. Fundamental Option Our actions can spring from different levels of our being. Not everything we do is a clear and complete expression of what springs from the deepest core of

23 our being. Some actions might be rooted there, but most of our actions spring from a peripheral level. This cautions us to refrain from concluding on the basis of isolated actions alone that anyone has embodied the full meaning and commitment of the self. What seems more likely is that we come to actualize who we are through a whole series of actions which when taken together express the basic character or dominant direction of our lives. This basic direction of our lives, which manifests a rather consistent personal identity, is our fundamental stance. Those significant moments of choice in our lives, which establish or affirm more strongly than others the character and direction of our lives, are fundamental options. Fundamental option finds its roots in the biblical concepts of covenant and heart. This assumes the basic conviction of the covenantal experience, namely, that we are born graced. That is, God has created us out love for love. We are the good creation of a gracious God. Without destroying our freedom, Gods love for us has so affected us in out innermost being (i.e. our hearts) as to make a claim or demand on us and to give us an orientation toward love and life. Our response is to live out of this orientation in freedom. To agree to live in covenant with God is a basic act of faith the most self-committing choice we can ever make. This act of faith is the fundamental option. Yet we live out this condition in a broken world a world where original and social sin abound, and a world where many temptations and bad influences arise to contradict the very orientation of our innermost being, or heart. Though more deeply marked by grace than by sin, we always stand in need of purification and conversion. This gives a dynamic character to a life constant growth. We just have to pay much attention to our ultimate end and the necessity to make decision for that end i.e. God calling us into communion with Him. Our basic decision is whether we live our lives in communion with God or not. In other words, fundamental stance expresses the sort of person we have chosen to be, the fundamental direction we have chosen for our lives. It brings a stable direction, enduring quality and personal meaning to our actions. The fundamental stance of a Christian is one which allows the great commandment, the person of Jesus and the values of the gospels to function as a critical judge of ones relationships and activities. The challenge of moral living is to do those actions which are consistent with the love of God. The role of the heart (core of being) in the moral life gives full force to the biblical prayers which beseech God for a pure heart and give power to sayings, Where your treasure is, there will be your heart (Mt. 6:21), and Of what the heart is full, the mouth will speak (Mt. 12:34). The goal of moral growth is to live single heartedly committed to God so that our actions are consistent with whom we have chosen to be true to that commitment. A choice which arises from such personal depth that it can significantly reverse or reinforce the fundamental direction of our lives is a fundamental option. To qualify as a fundamental option, a choice must be rooted in a deep knowledge of self and a freedom a freedom to commit oneself. Through a fundamental option we express our basic freedom of self-determination to

24 commit ourselves profoundly toward a certain way of being in the world. These are decisions appropriate to those who have reached the necessary stage of identity and who are able to commit themselves in knowledge and with freedom to a community or a person. Pope John Paul II has used the idea of fundamental option in similar way in his document on catechetics, Catechesi Tradendae(1979). When speaking about the youth, he writes: With youth comes the moment of the first great decisions. Although the young may enjoy the support of the members of your family and their friends, they have to rely on themselves and their own conscience and must ever more frequently and decisively assume responsibility for their identity. God and evil, grace and sin, life and death will more and more confront one another within them, not just moral categories but chiefly as fundamental option which they must accept or reject lucidly conscious of their own responsibility.(#39) The above statement of Pope John Paul II suggests that a) those fundamental decisions which affect the basic direction of our lives are not made quickly or easily. We must truly be ready for them on all levels of our personality. b) these statements also show that fundamental choices are deeply rooted in the character of our lives. Our basic decisions have to do with our commitment to others, and our sense of responsibility to the world and around us. Freedom from and Freedom for5 Freedom from Authentic freedom involves first of all freedom from everything that opposes our true self-becoming with others in community. Interior obstacles: ignorance, disordered passions, fear, personality defects, bad habits, prejudices, psychological disturbances Exterior forces: violent force or threat of violence Sin the greatest obstacle to authentic freedom. Liberation to true freedom means first and foremost liberation from the radical slavery of sin. These impediments to authentic freedom are commonly traced to three sources: 1) biological which includes inherited handicaps and defects as well as external substances like drugs; 2) psychological or interior compulsions, including those originating in the unconscious; 3) social pressures such as economic, political and cultural which impede the right to freedom Freedom for
5

CFC # 695-697

25 This freedom from is obviously directed towards freedom for growing as full persons and children of God, sharing in the life of Christ our Liberator through his Spirit. It is the freedom found in authentic love; freedom which have personal as well as social dimensions. Our personal freedom for is both a process and a task. Through our free choices, striving to overcome the obstacles, and doing our work (task), we gradually grow (process) towards authentic, mature fundamental self-freedom. The goal of this process and task of personal freedom is to be set free from slavery to corruption and share in the glorious freedom of the children of God (Rom. 8:21). Christ has freed us by giving everyone the power the conquer sin and to recover the meaning of our freedom and so attain the good and accomplish our calling as children of God. Freedom to attain the good simply means to act as Jesus did. The Holy Spirit is within us creating space for our freedom and making us alive. Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom (2Cor 3:17). Thus, it is the power of Christs Spirit within us that liberates us from sin for a life of loving service to our fellowmen, wherein we find our true selves by imitating Jesus our Lord. For the fruit of the Spirit is love, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, and self-control (Gal 5:22f). Knowledge The object / goal of moral freedom is not a choice between objects, but rather the self-realization of the person. If this is the case, the moral agent (who constitutes him/herself in that self-realization) must also have moral knowledge. The object/goal of moral knowledge is not outside of the person but the very person him/herself in all his/her realities and possibilities. When we speak of knowledge in morality, we bear in mind two kinds of knowledge conceptual and evaluative. Conceptual knowledge is important because it functions in ensuring the passing on of moral wisdom from one generation to another. It is also important because it can help us live better in a moral community which shares with us a common understanding of moral life and experience. While we appreciate the value of conceptual knowledge we must be careful not to equate immediately with genuine moral knowledge. On the other hand, evaluative knowledge is the one we consider as the genuine moral knowledge. This is because it is the knowledge that calls forth decisions and actions which express ones moral freedom. We can never realize our morality freely if we do not possess evaluative knowledge. Conceptual Knowledge In moral life when we talk of conceptual knowledge we are basically dealing with knowledge of self and knowledge of values.

26 Conceptual knowledge is head knowledge. It refers to the right knowledge of information and mastery of facts. This type of knowledge is easy to grasp and verify observations, facts and logic can cross-checked or double-checked. Communications of conceptual knowledge is likewise easy especially nowadays preaching, teaching, internet, publications, sharing, etc are different modes of communicating this knowledge. A conceptual knowledge of the self results from making the self the object of scrutiny and of expressing what one discovers about oneself. Psychological testing is one of the instruments where the personality of the person is objectively determined; it gives a good picture of us potentials, preferences, character orientation, etc. The basic condition of our identity as persons influences the manner we are able to interpret a moral reality and respond to it. What are the implications of conceptual self-knowledge on moral? To live rightly we need to express ourselves according to the capacities we have. We must be faithful and honest to what capacities we have and respond according to them, otherwise, we cause damage to ourselves and eventually to others too. No one is obliged to do what s/he is not capable of doing. The basic demand of Christian morality is to live according to the graces we have received. In other words, the goal of our moral efforts is to become what God wants us to be by appropriating our capacities and developing ourselves within the limitations we find ourselves. If we live in this manner, we are assured that our moral life is indeed a continuous expression of praise and thanksgiving to God since we are living our very life according to the uniqueness of the gifts that we are. Regarding moral values, conceptual knowledge is knowledge about values. In other words, our knowledge of values comes through our comprehension of rules or norms and the various means to realize or do what the norms or laws ask to fulfill. We use conceptual moral knowledge to communicate values and promote or argue against our position. If ever we change our values, it is precisely because of our experience of that value as satisfying a basic need. A simple conceptual grasp that a particular course of action is right or wrong is not enough to guarantee a person to act in a virtuous manner. A virtuous action entails the interiorization of the values inherent in the action. That is why there is no substitute to personal commitment in moral conduct. Evaluative Knowledge Moral knowledge specifically speaking is evaluative knowledge. It is the knowledge of the heart. This is the kind of knowledge we obtain from our selfinvolvement or commitment to someone or to something or values. In other words, evaluative knowledge is more personal, more self-involving than conceptual knowledge. This type of knowledge is not apprehended by words but by touch, sight, sound, by experiences of successes and frustrations,

27 sleeplessness and dedication, etc. In sum, we can say that evaluative knowledge is a felt knowledge; we discover by personal involvement and reflection. Unlike conceptual knowledge which can be taught and detached from person, evaluative knowledge cannot be separated from the person because it is the person him/herself who is caught up or has experienced through personal commitment and involvement. Regarding values, evaluative knowledge is self-involving (and self evolving) knowledge. This makes our decisions and actions expressions of what we truly value as our own. Without this knowledge all we have are hearsay since we do not depend on what we have discovered as valuable. Knowledge of value is not apprehended nor changed by rational argument only, but by experience, discovery and appreciation of values on the personal level.