he Fluman Person

r]
broadconsensus in moral^theologi-
J'rr,.. Vatican II, a significantly
person is the most appropriate point of
cal literature suggests that the human and for
departure for elaborati"g ;" int *t"ttit'g
of morality in general
providing the fundament?l criteria which u" tttttt"ty for dealing u'ith spe-
cific moral questions. &;;;;;, the human has always been taken seriously
for Catholics' to take the human
in Roman Catholic -otl intotogy because-'
God who became incarnate in the
seriously is to take ,.ti;;tly th;"'""to'
humanity of Jesus. H;;;;' tt'ott striking.feature about the-reneu'al in
'ht notice-able shift from using the lan-
moral theology since int to"I1tit is the
orrrrre of "human nature" to that of the
"human person'"
suaB;;1sHii."rf;; proloundly the rvay the human person serves as rhe
behavior' For example' from its per-
criterion for determinit[ p'optt moral of com-
emph-asized the natural tendencies
spective on human .,""?t'*tiitn abso-
Catholic moral thinking derived
mon bodily ,,.rr.,,.tt' l"a f"t"tio"'' were done in
which
lute, univers"l ,to.-'' M;;lly righractions,were
those
t'ih f"t"lty' The moral absolutes in Catholic
accord with the ,t*uoi
"t'Joi
are determined on this basis'
- - ethics, for
"sexual
example,
allowed a movement a\\/ay
it . shiit to the human person, ho$,ever, has of bodily strucrul:::and func-
from basing .no."t .otttlt"io't' ot the finality founda-
persln A personalistic
rions taken i.,a.p.rla.t'ily olttre totality 9f.1he et Spes'
Council inGaudiun
tion for morality *"''f il;;tit Sttond Vatican
in Part II of that
employed
especially in Part I. d;;;tnalistic
criterion was
to marriage and the tamily:
document when dealing with i"ssues pertaining

Thereforewhenthereisaquestionofharmonizingconjugallor'e
the moral aspect of anr
with the ,.rpot"iblt t"t"tni"iott of life'
obiective.standards' These'
procedure . . . ttt"tt be determined by
based on the nature of the human Person and his
acts ' (n' 51)'

63
 I'aith 'I'he Human Person 65
Rewon Informed BY
GI

et Spes' ina common human condition u,hich has a common end, namelv Ciod. lt also
l,otris .f rtrrsscns, who has studicd thc official commentary of Gaudiu.m
of human activity, ancl says that human clignity does not dcpend ultimately on human achievements,
fi,,,l, ,i.,,,r this expression applies to the entire dornain
11.t jrrsl t. sexuai activity.'Also, this is affirmed by the expression but on divine love. We have u'itnessed the moral implications of this in
arguments against abortion, in del-ense of care for handicapped nerylyrrns,
'rincipleas it refers to the human person
rlt;rr "ltrrrlrl'r activity must be iudge<1 insofar
intt'glally and adeqlatelv consideicd."r In other words, in personalistic
mo- -
-'-' |justice
and in reflection on issues of economic and social for all regaldlctrs of
" (,
r aliry thc human p".ro., adequately considered
is the criterion for discovering race or hrrman attributes.
morally right.
rvlrt't ltcr :rn act is
Further implications of the image of God motif for a personalistic moral-
'l'5is chapter .orrrii".i the anthropological basis of pers.nalistic moral- ity can be drawn out of elaborations of the central symbols for God in the
ity. It begins *ith ,tt. theological fonn'datiJn-s by presenting. an understand- Christian faith. For example, the root svmbol of God is "God is love" (l Jn
4:8 and 16), i.e., God is the one who is perfectly self-giving. This claim leads
irig of th"e human person as the image of God' Its second section briefly
adequately con- to the Trinity which is the theological code word for the freedom and totality
tlc"scribes the fundamental dimensiorrr-of ",h. human Person
sidcred": a relational being, an embodied subiect, an historical. be,lng' and of God's self-giving. It means that God is eternally the giver or lover (Father),
-1
lrcing fundamentally .qr.tr'l .o others but-lniq9cly original'. Finally'
it will the receiver or beloved (Son), and the gift or love u'hich binds them together
(Spirit). When God expresses divine love outside the Trinity, nature colnes
briefl'y state the p.rro.r"litti. criterion which is to be applied in
making a
moral fudgment about human acts.
into being, with the human Person being the point at which nature reaches
self-consciousness.
As Michael and Kenneth Himes have shown, our understanding of the
Image of God triune nature of God (both the immanent and the economic Trinity) can shed
To say that the Person adequately considered is the norm of morality light on the true meaning of being human. For example, by putting this great
docs not dethrone God and raise the human person to the level
of supreme symbol of the Christian tradition into dialogue with the economic and ethical
valuc. God remains supreme, the ultimate center of value' In fact, the biblical themes of the pastoral Ietter, Econornic Justice for All, they point out that
for
rvirness to rhe -yr,.iy of creation provides the theological foundation
rrnclcrsranding th! ultimate place of God and human life as a reflection
of if God is triune, if God is the perfect relationship of the love and the
()<xl. The st6ry of crearion tells us that at the summit of creation stands beloved and the love which unites them, then to maintain that the
woman and man, made in God's image (Gn l:26-27)' Through the
motif of human being is created in the image of God is to proclaim the
tlrc image of God (cf. Ps 8:5; Wis 2:23; I Cor 11:7; Jas 3:9)' the Bible human being capable of self-gift. The human person is the point at
uigurorriy affirms the sacredness or dignity of every Person prior to any which creation is able to acknowledge gratefully the divine self-gift
human achievemenr. The Catholic tradiiion, as reflected for example in the and to respond by giving oneself in return.2
Vatican Declaration on Abortion (n. 5) and in the pastoral letter EconomicJustice
Likewise, the trinitarian doctrine implies a communitarian understand-
|ilrAtt(n.32'79),hasbaseditsclaimsforfundamentalhumandignityand ing of being human. The trinitarian vision sees that no one exists by oneself,
hrrrn:rn rights on this theological foundation' -l'he
'l'n ,lry that the human"person is the "image of God" is first.a theological but only in relationship to others. To be is to be in relationship. individ-
-before
slittcment it is an anthropological one. This means that it says some- ual and the community co-exist. Humanity and relatedness are ProPortional
what so that the deeper one's participation in relationships is, the more human one
rlting about the relation beru,een God and us which has implications for
ir ,rr'i.rns to be human. For example, one thing it says is that God has so becomes. Since community is necessary to grow in God's image, the funda-
cstrrlrlishcd a relationship with .tt fh.t the human Person cannot be properly mental responsibility of being the image of God and for living in conrmunity
rr'tlc'sr..d apart from iod. God sustains this relationship by divine faithful- is to give oneself away as completely as possible in imitation of God's self-
rrt.ss unrl loue. As long as Gocl offers divine love
(i.e., grace), humans will ever giving. The freedom which humans need for living morally is the freeclom to
rt.rrrlrirr ()<xl's image- and enioy a sacred dignity whether- in sin or not, give themselves more completell'. A deeper particiPation in the human com-
u,lrt.rlrt:r rrcting hurianly or not.'The biblical truth about the human person is munity enhances the humanity of each person while the failure to establish
tlr:rt lx'ing thc image of God is irreversible' community diminishes the humanity of all. r
As :rn rrptl-rroiological statementr "image of God" saYs that u'e all share From tl-ris trinitarian r,ision of thc human person as the image of God u'e
 Infonned BY Faith The lluman Person 67
Reason
66

morality is the dy- based his analysis on the teaching tif Vatican [], especialh' Gau.dium et Spes.a
crtn sce that the tunclarnental clynamic of a personalistic I-Ie says, in brief, that tl-re human person is aclequately considered u'hcn taken
of tire great com-
narnic of receivinq and giving lovc' Thc Johannine version as an historical subject in corporeality u,ho stands in relation to the rvclrld' to
one
nrandment captuies it &".tt"y, "As I haie lovc'd vou' so -vou 1Ys::love other persons, to social structures, and to God, and u'htl is a unique original-
in imitation of
another" (Jn 13:34). We first receive love and then "'" to iou" ity u'ithin the context of being fundamentally equal with all other Persons.
life-breathing in
tl'rc love u'e have be"r, giuen. It is like the basic rhythm
<lf
life To say that these dimensions constitute an "integral and adequate" consider-
and breathing out. wf,; .i,rt.t paft of this dynamic m-oveTelt ceases' ation of the person means that the human person is alu'ays, and at the same
the image of God
cnds. The trinitarian ,iri." to
person tells us that be
"iifrJ lived out of the time, every one of these dimensions interacting to form a slrnthesis which is
is not only a gift but ,tro r.rpo,tsibility' The moral life the integral human person. My separating them here is purelv fbr purposes of
"
image of God not o"ff t.;oi..t'i., *h't"o"e has received as gift' but also
discussion. Since Janssens does not claim a hierarchy for these dimensions, I
proitir., to use these gifts wetl in communion with others'
fundamental will present them in a manner slightly different from his own by organizing
This theologi.d ti;i;" ;f ,ht Person lrelps us to see that our them under four maior groups: a relational being, an embodied subiect, an
relationship to God g;;6;"t;ti it'-"d ttr-rough the wa1's,we
":1"* -glf-:: historical being, and a being fundamentally equal to others but uniquely
of God is an rmperattve
enhrnce the giftJdness of others' To be the image original.
"nd received by moving
calling us to live o,r, oiitt" fullness of the gifts we have
outofourselvesandintotheworldofourrelationships.To^withdrawintoand A Relational Being
of receiving
;;;t;it;;; ; horra o.t, gir,s, and to cut off the dynamicand to mock God'
to abort our gifts The trinitarian vision of God in its implications for humanity under-
ili"g love by r"f,r.i.rg tJgift the
another is
of self-giving..-.hitl being the t*iq: scores very clearly the relational dimension of being human. Human exis-
?i i. ,1", ,;mity put. Iiden"ies sort
fully in communron
"j
God demands, and it blocks the movement toward Iiving tence does not precede relationship, but is born of relationship and nurtured
withGodandothers.ThejudgmentparablewhichJesustoldof.thetalents by it. To be a human person is to be essentially directed toroard others. We te
is a pou'erful indictment of communal at our core. The image of being human in the creation storv is a
given to the three servants i., Nl"ttht- 25:14_10
this kind of life. communal one: "And now we u'ill make human beings; thev will be like us
of
A personalistic morality with th-eological foundations in the image them to
and resemble us. . . Male and female, God created them" (Gn l:26-27).
we use
God asks: Have we accepted our gifts, and how u'ell do Personal existence, then, can never be Seen as an "1" in isolatiOn, but alu'ays
the development of the as "I" and "you" in relationship.
contribute to positive, 1;g.'-giui"g reiationships and to
In otf,er .^ro.dr, the m'ral implications of the trinitarian The significance of being directed torvard others has wide-ranging moral
human environment?
to do with the quality of implications. In medical moral matters, for instance, it has implications for
vision of the human p.rron as the image of God have
destroy the network of uoih ludging the appropriareness of using life-sustaining treatments and for
our relationships and *irh f,o- ot" "tiot" build up or
relationships which make up human life' determining death. If someone's capacity for relationships, i.e., one's capac-
ity to receive love and to give love, never develops (as in the case of the
The Person AdequatelY Considered anencephalic fetus) or is irreversibly lost (as in the case of those in a chronic
vegerative state) can we say that he or she enioys human life in srrch a
ThehumanPerson..adequatelyconsidered''isthepersonasunderstood personal way that it ought to be sustained at all costs? An awareness of iustice
byr"rro.,informedbyfaith'Thebiblicaltruthabouthumanitybeingthe also shows us that personal existence is a shared existence. Through inter-
grasp of the
ir|,rg. of God is the clnviction of faith which informs reason's dependence we discover that we bear mutual responsibilities. Our prrrsuit of
so in the
h.rJ.. person' If v'e are irreversibly the image of God' then u'e. are intellect individual ends can be justified onlv to the extent that u'e resPect the patterns
such
totality of our personalities arrd noi iust in certain aspects,
a.s
the person of inter-dependence which make up our relational selves. From the point of
,rra *itt. so ail the fundamental dimensions r,r'hich constitute vieu' of justice, then, we need to ask u'hether our moral choices and actions
;:irrt"g..[y and adequatell, considered" participate in the human person's
detract from the value of true community or promote the kind of self-giving
imaging God. which sustains the well-being of life together.
Inthissection,Iamcleeplyindebtedtotheu'orku'hichLouisJanssens As relational, social beings, human Persons need /a liae in social groups
th. .o.t..pt of the person adequatelv considered' He
has done to elaborate
 Reason Informed B.Y Faith 'I'he Iluman Person 69
68

human dignitv ancl the comrnon good' clulv infbrnrecl ancl free conscience. Sincc the inptlrtancc ri'hich thc (latholic
witb appropriate structilres u'hich sustain
-rt *"r^r significance of this aspect of being hrrrnan is that \\'e must resPect traclition has gir,en to the person as moral sullject requires morc attention, thc
" ani institutions of socicty u'hich promote cornrlurlal living and sulrsequent chaptcrs on freeclonr anti knou'lcdgc, sin, and cousciencc u'ill
,fr.-f"*,
rrohold the common good. But \\1e must be careful not
to absolutize any one explore this aspcct at greater length.
.,l,"rrr firrm. The ieed for social structurcs demands that struct*res be Tcr speak of the human Person as 'an embndiel subiect is t<l use a morc
rener.l,ed, and at times revisecl, according to changing
circumstances and the unitivc cxpression than thc farniliar one r.ri "txdy anc'l soul," the (]reek ver-
grorving demands of hurnan dignity' For example, slavery \\/as once an ac- sion of this aspect of being human. "F.mboclied subiect" inlplies tlrat <tur
i.p,"a iocial institution in biblLal times as well as in the formati'e years of bodies are not accessories. Thet, are not merely sornething rt'e hal'e to house
this country; however, it is no krnger accepted because the sense of what our subjectivity, but are essential to our being integrated Persons. We cxpress
human dignity demands could not.uppott it' Likewise, many
today find the ourselves as the image of God through our bodies. What concerns the body
ir*, fruoiing capital punishment to b. ttttpttt in light of new structures of inevitably concerns the whole person, for our bodies are essential to being
lau. enforcement as well as a heightened sense of the respect due
the dignity human and to relating in human ways. The fact that u,e have bodies affects
of human life. The moral significance of living with appropriate
structures in every expression of ourselves in relationship. The affection of love, for exam-
social groups is that in maiittg moral choices, we need to ask
u'hether our ple, needs to be expressed in bodily ways, such as through a gift, or a kiss, or
actions"wili preserve o. .r.rd..rii.re the basic structures (such as marriage
and an embrace, or sexual intercourse. God so krved us as to come to us in bodily
the family) *hi.h *. need in order to safeguard and promote human well- form so that u,e could know divine love in the only rvay humans can knou'
being. it-in an embodied form.
"The
relational dimension of being human reaches its high point in our The fact that we have bodies and cannot enrer inro relationships apart
relationship to Godin faith, hope, andlove' Each PerTl has
eternal signifi- from them entails a number of moral demands. Since our bodies are svmbols
cance and worrh. The moral i..rpo.t of this aspect of the person is that all of interiority, bodily expressions of love in a relationship ought to be propor-
relationships must find their source and fulfillment in God. After all, the tionate to the nature of the commitment bettveen persons. Alscl, boclilr'exis-
fundamenial conviction of our faith is that human life is fulfilled in knowing, tence means that we must take seriousll' the limits and potential of the
loving, and serving God in communion with others' biological order. Since the body is subiect to the lau's of the material t-orld,
we must take these lau,s into account in the way we treat our bodies. \\'e are
not free to intervene in the body in any way we want. For example, to flood
An Embodied Subiect the blood system with toxic drugs means to so damage the body as to kill
To speak of the human Person as a subject is to say that the person is in ourselves. To relate u'ell to others we must take care of our bodily health and
char$€ of hi, o. her own life. That is, the person is a moral agent
with a respect bodily integrity. Bodily existence also means that we must accept our
certain degree of autonomy and self-determination empowered to-act
accord- genetic endowment u'hich sets the baseline for certain possibilities and limita-
ing to his"or her conscience, in freedom, and u,ith kno$'ledge. The catholic rions ro our phvsical, intellectual, and psychological capacities. We have the
,."'di,ion has been clear that we cannot speak of morality in anv true sense moral responsibility to live u'ell within these limits and not to push otrrselves
apart from human persons who are able io act knowinglv and u'illingly
(cf' to become or to do what our genotyPes, taken together u'ith our environ-
Sf. I-II, prologue). ment, would not support.
The gr"atloral implication of the person as subiect is that no one may As body persons we are a part of the naterial world. To be a part of the
ever use ihurn"r, p.rru.t as an obfect or as a means to an end the rvav we do marerial world holds both great potential and serious limitation. 1-he poten-
other things of the world. Every right entails a duty, and the rights that tial is that, created in God's image v,ith the mandate to bring the earth under
belong ,o ih" p.rron as subiect entail the duty of demanding respect
for them' human control, we can act as co-agcnts ir ith God to make the u'orlj a
And so we must respect the other as an autonomous agent capable of acting continuously more livable place. The developments of sciencc and technol-
u,ith the freedom of an inforryed conscience. Exploitation of human Persons ogy are certainly helping us to do that. But human creations are ambiquous.
for one's own advantage is never allou'ed. we show respect for the hurnan Herein lies the serious limitation. The very' products which help us to im-
basis of a prove communication, production, and prosperitv can be detrimental to our
person as a subiect b/guaranteeing that he or she can act on the
70 Reasox Informed lly Faitlt
corporeality and communalitv bv entailing negative effects such as traffic
congestion, air, u,ater, and noise pollution, land erosion, and the accttmuia-
tion of toxic waste. I-ikcu'ise, the \,ery techniques which are being developed
in the life sciences to benefit the human community, such as developments in
reprocluctive technology' and genetic engineering, can easily be extended to
produce disturbing results for the wholeness of societv and the common
good. Being part of the material world requires moral agents to consider the
negative effects necessarily entailed in the positive discoveries of technologv
and to weigh their moral importance.
An Historical Subiect
An embodied spirit is necessarily an historical subiect. While the spirit
enables us to become more than ourselves, our bodies anchor us in the here
and now" To be an historical subject, then, means to be relentlessly temporal,
seizing each opportunity of the present moment as Part of a progressive
movement toward our full human development. Much of spiritual theology
today has capitalized on this characteristic of the person by using the meta-
phors of Iife as a journey and of each person as a pilgrim made to rest only in
God. Narrative theologv, too, reflects on the temporality of human existence
when it talks about the "narrative quality of experience, "r i. e. , every moment
of iife is in tension with the past and the future. When we integrate our Past
into the person we are becoming we move into the future not only with a
sense of integrity but also u'ith a coherent sense of direction.
The moral imperative of being an historical subiect is to integrate the
past into the person we are becoming so as to shape a future rather than to
settle into a static condition. The moral significance of the personal historical
process is that one's moral responsibility is proportionate to his or her capaci-
ties at each stage of development. We must be careful to regard moral culpa-
bility for behavior relative to each stage of development. Also, the actions of
historical subjects have their full moral meaning only when considered in
relationship to the total context u'hich includes the future consequences.
Just as persons develop and change, so do cultures. Progress or regress is
always possible and the elaboration of new values is never ending. As neu'
possibilities open up to us through science and technology (such as artificial
means of reproduction) and as ne\\r values emerge (such as a new appreciation
for the relational meaning of sexuality), we must constantly discern and order
lau,'s and values which rvill enrich human dignity. As historical subjects, our
moral reflection must be as dynamic as the human life which it intends t<r
guide. As we acquire ne\\' potential and elaborate netl' t'alues, we need to
discover appropriate \\/ays to integrate them into our uniquely individual but
r'onrrnonlv shared I ives.
Tl:e Human Person 7t
L'undamentally Equal but
Llnique\ Ariginal
The dimensions of being human considerecl tl'rus f ar afhrm a frndatncntal
equality among human persons. Iiquality allor.vs us to takc an intcrcst in
everything that is human and to understand the moral obligations u'hich
inform our common humanity. Flou'ever, human persons are sufficiently
diverse so that u.'e must also taken into account the originalitl, and unitlueness of
each person. This means that while everyone shares cgrtain common features
of humanity, each one does so differently and to different degrees.
James M. Gustafson has analyzed a person's unique moral character
according to the uncontrollable and the somervhat controllable features.6 The
fertures of ourselves over r.lhich we have no conlrol in esrablishing our
uniqueness are our genetic endou'ment, our unconscious motives, and the
social-cultural conditioning to which we have been subjected in the process of
growing up.
Beyond these uncontrollable features are those over u hich lr'e do have
some control. One of these features is our beliefs, or stable convictions,
which give direction and meaning to our lives. The extent to u,hich our
beliefs influence the originality of our lives depends not only on u'hat beliefs
we hold but also on how intensell, u'e hold them. The perspective, or point of
view, from which we look on the u'orld also accounts for originalitr'. What
we think is important and how we respond to it are inlluenced b1' the \\'ay $/e
see it. Also, dispositions, or a readiness to act in a certain wa1', mark our
unique character. Affections, or sensitivities, influence the depth and swift-
ness of our moral responses. Finally, our intention, or the basic direction of
our actions governed by our knou'ledge and freedom, puts the distinctive
mark of personal style on what we do.
In each of us, these leatures are all interrelated through the imaginarion.
Understood in its deepest sense, the imagination is not merely a capacity for
frivolity in an otherwise serious u'orld; rather, the imagination is the capacity
to construct a world. By means of the imagination u'e brinq together diverse
experiences into a meaningful u'hole. Influenced by the philosophy of Paul
Ricoeur, Philip Keane describes the imagination in his studr', Cbristian Ethics
and tbe lrnagination,
as the basic processby which u'e drau' together the concrete and the
universal elements of our human experience. With imagination u'e
let go of any inadequately pre-conceived notions ofhori. the abstract
and the concrete relate to one another. We suspend iudgment about
how to unite the concrete and the abstract. We let the tu'o sides of
our knowing play with one another. By allowing this interplav
 71
Tfu Human Persort
Reason Infonned BY Faith
72

[-he Personalistic Criterion

between the tu'o asPccts of our knowing,
we ge-t.a much deeper
chance to look at rvhat u'e know, to form
a vision of it'7 These then are climcnsions of the human Person adequatelv considcred'
Wtren taken together in an integrated u'ar-, thcy fcrrn'r thc foundation of a
Wlrenwe..getthepicture''throughtheimaginativeprocesswecometo personalistic mirality. l,ouis Janssens has used these cssential dirnensirlns of
rrn image which"puts together diVerse beliefs
and experiences_so that \ve can ,h. hl.,,-,,rr,-, pcrson to form this criterion: an action is morally rigbt if it is
(i
it
,,nd"rsia.r.i -h"i is goiig on and relate to appropriatelv.
When religious bcneficial to the person adequately considered in himself or herself e '' as an
lrcliefs, for example,*".."p"r, of the imaginative process, they enter into the unique, emboclied spiri$ and in his or her relations (i.e.' to others, tti social
conrent of what *. ."p.ii..rce and contribute toward connecting the manv .r.u.r.,."r, to tht: material world, and to God).e For Janssens this is an
tlirnensions of experience with the values entailed in those beliefs. This gives obiective criterion since it is based on the constant dimensions of being
"picture" of
,,r r dirtlrl.tively religious the world and a wav of responding to human. But since it is a criterion about the human Person as an historical
it such as we explored in the last chapter' being, it requires a regular review of the possibilities we have available to
Since *" guided and formed by the images which give us a "picture" p.o.inr" the human p".ron so that \\'c can determine whether they truly do
^."
ol- the world, the imagination sets the directitn and
limits of our moral ,n. Jr,l.r"rm r".ogrrires that the application of this criterion is not easy. To
llcSavior. The imaginat-ion informs what we think, what we see' the way we use"it in a *or"ll-y responsible u,ay requires u,isdom-the special gift of the
fcel, our readinessio act, and the direction of our actions. It gives a definite- morally goo<1 peison who has an affinitv for u'hat is right and whose iudg-
llcss to our characters in such a way that when our master images change, we ment i; iirpir.a by a morally good disposition, an attitude u'hich is ready to
,,r. ,ig.rifi.a.ttly changed. Since this is so, we find a clue to ourselves
through place our activitv as much as possible at the service of the human person
They help us to organize our lives and adequately considered. ro
rhc m-aster i.n^ge, of ihe imagination'
irr{lrrence our rnoral arguments. choices' and actions'
A person's ,tniqu! identity within the fundamental equality of
a commu- Conclusion
nity of persons has profouncl moral implications' especially for giving pasto-
As we try to understand the human person adequately, u'e .may better
features of human-
r.rrl'guidance. Becauie each person embodies the common appreciate the great advantage of the language of "human Person" over
"hu-
the same situation
ity iiiffer.rrtly, we canno, .*p.., nvo people to respond-to man nature" t6 express the anthropological foundations of morality. The
i,r rhc same way. They ,r" simply not capable of it' One's
moral character
advantage to "human nature" is that it underscores what is common to all' Its
is limited both
,.'t, th. ,".tg" oi porsibllities fot ttiiott' Eaih person's capacity great di.lsadvantage, however, is that it does not adequatelv express one's
givens inte-
l,y the .r.r.5.trroil"ble givens and by.the somewhat controllable iundamental orifinality. The language of "human pelso,n, by contrast, is
gi'.t"a by one's moral"imagination. Even though -: *1y all.,appeal to the
will only be able more adequa,. 6"."n.. it caPtures the uniqueness of the person u'ithout
each of us
srrnc objective norms in rela'tion to the same issue, abandoning those features of the common human condition and the moral
according to his or her
lo live uP to the norm and respond .t-o--lht issue to demands founded uPon them.
behavior is relative
cupacity.^A person's sublective responsibility for-moral A view of the iruman person such as the one presented here challenges
can be held responsi-
itr" a"ultop*ent of that i..so."t moral capaci'y' fo one
Roman Catholic theology to integrate empirical evidence into its moral
assess-
lrlc lor doing what is be1'en6 his or her power to do" ments. Moral theology a personalistic perspective must take into ac-
f.o*
the
In a pisto.al ,ettirig, then, the ad"ite of Bernard Hnring reflecting count the experienceJ of people over time in order to determine what sorts of
"One should never try to impose
u,isrl'm oi S,. ,{prro.rr,i, Lig.rn.i is sound, activities beit serve the peison adequatelv considered. As a result' moral
case ofprevent-
the other person cannot"sincerely internalize, except the
u,lrur theology must include noi only deductive but also inductive methods in order
hold a Person
itrg grave iniuitice tou'ard a third person'"8 We can only to take-human experience seriously. An inductive approach rvill yield reliable
that capacity. A-p.er.son is only
sccourrtable for what is relative to person's
though tentative conclusions oPen to revision. \ew historical erperience and
to do tre or she is capable of doing. There-
,.,.,,,tty culpable for failing-r.tio.r, rr,,hat
new"euidence u,ill emerge to reinforce a position already held or to call it into
lr',c, since each person', remain subiect to iustification in light of
one's capacity, we question and ask that it be reformulated or rescinded if necessary.
,lrjt.ctivc moral ntrms, the demands of the situation, and Even though each of the features of the human Person treated above can
betu'een what a moral situation demands
,',rr'r cxpcct to find some differences be given rrr.,.L,.-gr""r.r elaboration in order to develop the anthropological
,,1 ,,rtclrcrson and what it demands of another'
74 Reason Inf'onned BY f'uith

foundations of a personalistic mtirality of responsibilitv, I u'ill fiicus in thc

ncxt chaptcr only on those u,hich the (,atholic tradition has macle the irldis-
pensable features of thc. nroral subtect: knou'ledgc ancl freeclom. Iior u'itllout
ih.r. *" c'lo not have rrue ntortlity at all. 'I-he subscquent chaPters on sin and
conscience u'ill then consider the person e\)en rlore adequately in the light of
faith and grace.

Notes

l. Louis Janssens, "Artificial lnsemination: Ethical considerations,"

Louvain Studies 8 (Spring 1980): 4.
2. Michael 1. Him.s and Kenneth R' Himes, "Rights, Economics, and
the Trinity," Commonttseal 113 (March 14, 1986): 139'
3. Ibid., pp. 139-140.
4. t ouis Janssens explored these dimensions in a preliminary way in
,,Personalisr Morals," Loutsain studies 3 (Spring 1970): 5-16. His most
his
worked out version is in the methodological introduction to his treatment of
artificial insemination, "Artificial Insemination: Ethical Considerations," L\u-
vainStudies 8 (Spring 1980): 5-13.
5. The e*pr"ision is from Stephen Crites, "The Narrative Qualitv of
Iixperience," Journal of the American Acadenty of Religion 39 (197 l): 2^91-311.
6. For this analysis of Gustafson's, see l-is can Ethics Be cl:ristian?
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1975), pp. :2*47 '
z. enitlp S. Keane, Christian Ethics an.d the Imaginatioz (Ramsey: Paulist
Press, 1984), p. 81. some of the influential material from Paul Ricoeur are
..The Metaphorical Process as cognition, Imagination, and Feeling," critical
Inquiry 5 (f978), pp. 143-159; aIso, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences, ed.
.rrd ti".rt. by John B. Thompson (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
198 l).
8. Bernard Haring, Free and Faithful in Christ, Vol. 1: General Moral
't'heologl (New York: Seabury Press, 1978), p. 289.
9. 1r.ttt.ttt, "Artificial Insemination: L,thical Considerations," I'ouaain
Studizs 8 (Spring 1980): ll.
10. Ibid.,pp. l4-15.