General Moral Theology

1. Notion of Theology. - Theology is a science deduced from the principles of revelation concerning God and other things in order to God. For, led by the light of supernatural revelation, it treats scientifically of the deity itself, that is, of God as God. Now God, under the aspect of deity, is a supernatural being, inasmuch as He is elevated absolutely above every created nature and natural knowledge, and knowable by revelation alone, and is the supernatural principle or cause and end of things, especially of man.

Theology embraces a twofold part: first, one is merely speculative, "concerning God in Himself and as He is the principle and end of things," which treats of God in Himself, one and triune, and of His works ad extra, especially of man, whom God has destined to a supernatural end: the intuitive vision of Himself, to which man can come through divine grace, which Christ bestows upon us. From this, secondly, there spontaneously arises the other, practical part: for if God is our principle and end, duties follow in us toward Him; namely, we must acknowledge Him as our author and tend toward Him as our ultimate end. This part immediately treats of human acts by which we tend toward God, and also, but consequently, of their rules and principles. Hence it is inscribed by St. Thomas: "concerning the motion of the rational creature toward God."

Thus in I, q. 2, in the proemium. - It is a treatise on man as the image of God "insofar as by image is signified what is intellectual, and free by choice, and possessing power over itself" (Damascene, De Fide Orthodoxa II, 12), that is, "insofar as he himself is the principle of his acts, as having free choice and power over his works." St. Thomas, I-II, in the prologue.

In brief: theology is the science of supernatural religion. Religion is the moral bond between God and man. Hence theology treats not only of God, the author and end of supernatural things, and of man destined to a supernatural end, but also of the bonds and duties by which man is bound to God, and of the moral relations also which intervene between the two.

2. Difference between Speculative and Practical Theology.

Speculative and practical theology differ:

1. In end: speculative theology directly and solely tends to the knowledge of truth, which it seeks for its own sake, that is, for the perfection of the intellect, and in which it rests; practical theology tends further to right operation and seeks truth for the sake of something else, that is, for the perfection of the will. Namely, it seeks those truths which are necessary for acting well; indeed, because it is a rule of acting, it directly and principally intends to direct human acts and morals. Hence it speculates concerning practice.

2. In matter: speculative theology treats of those things which are merely to be known or also believed, which are called matters of faith or dogmas, and therefore it is called dogmatic; practical theology treats of things to be known and at the same time to be done, which are called matters of morals, whence it is called moral.

3. Definition of Moral Theology. - Moral theology is defined: the part of theological science which treats of human acts to be ordered to God as supernatural end according to revealed principles. It is said:

1. Of science: for it is an evident and certain knowledge of truths which are deduced from certain principles and are coordinated among themselves into a synthesis by a logical connection and order; and thus it is distinguished from common and catechetical knowledge, which all the faithful in some way have concerning human acts and their duties.

2. Theological, that is, deduced from the principles of revelation; and thus it is distinguished from human and merely rational sciences, which proceed from the light of natural reason alone.

3. Part, because it is not a distinct species but only an integral and constitutive part of theological science. For theology does not embrace several sciences as philosophy does, but is an entirely one science, because it has one subject: God, and one formal reason (formal object by which): revelation. Hence moral theology is one and the same science with dogmatic theology, although they are different parts.

4. Which treats of human acts: this is the special matter of which moral theology treats and about which it is immediately occupied, namely, all human acts; and therefore it regards all things which pertain to them, and thus it is distinguished from dogmatic theology.

5. To be ordered to God as supernatural ultimate end: moral theology considers all things in order to God, the supernatural ultimate end, or to God as God. For theology has one principal subject, God, of whom dogmatic theology treats; and all other things, even human acts to be ordered, it considers in order and conformably to God, who is their supernatural principle, exemplar, and end. Hence moral theology is not a merely descriptive science, but a normative one, which judges human acts and directs them to the ultimate end; and yet it differs in species from natural ethics, which directs them to the natural end.

6. According to revealed principles: this is the formal reason, or the proximate motive and immediate medium by which the subject, which is the supernatural end, and the acts necessary for it are known. For revealed principles, admitted by the divine light of faith, are the medium for arriving at theological conclusions and for understanding them.

The conclusions themselves are properly the object of theological science, and they are concerning God and concerning things in order to God, especially, for the moral part, concerning human acts; although these are also customarily called by moderns the object: namely, God the primary object, other things the secondary object. But they understand the object about which theology treats, not the object which it asserts: the latter is theological conclusions.

4. Relation between Moral Theology and Other Disciplines.

From the preceding definition it is understood:

1. From Moral Philosophy: the latter considers human acts in order to the natural end and relies on the principles of reason alone; the former, however, considers human operations as they are ordered to the supernatural end, and its proper medium of knowledge is divine revelation; whence they differ in matter and end, and at the same time in the formal motive.

Nevertheless, a) the supernatural end does not exclude but rather contains the natural end, as the perfect contains the less perfect; likewise b) revelation does not destroy reason but rather perfects it; finally c) revelation also teaches and expressly confirms many rational moral truths, and has others connected with itself. And therefore moral theology agrees in many things with moral philosophy and includes the matter of the latter. But it exceeds it, because it extends more widely even to revealed things, namely, to supernatural actions, virtues, and laws, and because it directs us by a higher light.

2. A fortiori, from the Science of Civil Law, Politics, Sociology, Economics, etc., which have a proximate end that is temporal, or also particular, not the ultimate end itself.

3. From Dogmatic Theology, as has already been said, n. 2.

4. From Ascetical and Mystical Theology: moral theology in the stricter sense treats more of acts necessary to the end insofar as they are under precept (according to the purgative way from sin); ascetical and mystical theology treat of acts insofar as they are of perfection and counsel, that the end may be attained better and more fully. For they teach the ways of perfection, either for progressing in virtue and acquiring perfection (according to the illuminative way), or for exercising perfection and contemplative union with God (according to the unitive and mystical way).

Yet if moral theology is considered in its full and complete sense, it includes ascetical and mystical theology, which rest upon the same principles. But, just as dogmatic and moral theology are now usually treated separately, although they are two parts of one and the same theological science, so nothing prevents those things which are more of precept and those things which are of perfection and counsel from being specially and distinctly explained, as is usually done, yet as integral parts of one practical science ordered to the supernatural ultimate end.

5. From the Science of Canon Law and of Liturgy, which study the scientific knowledge of laws, that is, of their origin, interpretation, and mutual relation to one another and to their proper end. For they are immediately concerned with the laws by which the external order of the Church or public worship is determined, and consequently certain acts of the faithful are directed, but proximately to the order and governance of Christian society, not to the ultimate end. Hence they directly regard the social order and the external forum; moral theology, however, is immediately concerned with acts, and only consequently with laws, even ecclesiastical laws, but it takes these laws in relation to the ultimate end and treats of their value in the forum of conscience. And considered in this way, positive laws already pertain to moral science, of which they are an integral part.

6. From Pastoral Theology: this properly is not a science, but a practical method and art by which the pastor of souls, according to the principles of moral and ascetical theology, leads the souls entrusted to him to salvation and perfection.

B. That it excels the other practical sciences 1) in end and necessity, for unlike them it does not tend toward a further end but is concerned with the ultimate end itself; 2) in extension, for it touches all operations in order to the ultimate end; 3) in certitude, for it rests upon the divine light itself. Hence it is the supreme practical science, and therefore is a) the norm of the others, by which they are to be regulated, insofar as, with respect to their proper end and with respect to the choice and use of means, they must be honorable, conformable to the ultimate end; likewise b) their mistress, because the others serve it insofar as it uses them as aids, disposing of them for its own end.

D. That, unlike Ethics, which hypothetically supposes and feigns man such as he could have been but never was nor will be, namely, in the natural state, Moral Theology considers man such as he truly is. And therefore it alone is absolutely the practical science of morals.

Vermeersch, Theologia Moralis I, n. 1.

E. That it is inferior to Dogmatic Theology: 1) for it treats of human acts, which are a certain secondary matter, whereas dogmatic theology treats of God, who is the chief and proper subject of theology; whence 2) dogmatic theology is the foundation of the moral part; indeed 3) the end, since the moral part is ordered to speculative theology perfected in heaven, where, namely, the motion into God ceases, and there is now perfect rest in God.

5. Division of Moral Theology. - Moral theology is divided into a twofold part:

a) The general part explains the general and common notions and principles upon which one must rest as upon a foundation in solving various moral questions. Hence it treats:

1. Of the last end of man, to which and according to which all human acts must be ordered. For although it is last in execution, nevertheless it is first in intention; knowledge of it must be presupposed as the source, root, and hinge of all the rest, because nothing is willed unless it has been foreknown. Hence it stands as a kind of principle in morals and in operable things, since we are moved from the end to the means, and our acts have their impulse from the end, and thus all things depend upon the end and are ruled by it.

2. Of human or voluntary acts, to be ordered to the end.

3. Of their rules, to which they must be conformed, proximate and remote, namely, conscience and law.

4. Conversely, of acts discordant with conscience and law, or of sins.

5. Of the principles of human acts, or good and evil habits, virtues and vices. - Concerning all these it treats not in particular but in general.

b) The special part treats specifically of individual good and evil acts, of individual species of conscience, of individual virtues and vices, and of individual precepts pertaining to all these.

6. Method.

In moral theology a threefold method is used: a) positive, when proofs are drawn more from the documents of revelation and canons are enunciated; b) scholastic, when principles are more illustrated by reason, conclusions are established, and all things are proposed systematically and in order; c) casuistic, when principles are especially applied to practical cases. But it is preferable to use the threefold method together, so that we do not neglect the documents of revelation, especially insist upon founded reasons and systematic proposition, and, for the sake of clarity, also apply principles to certain cases.

7. Sources of Moral Theology are the same as for dogmatic theology, which in fundamental theology are usually explained under the theological places. For theology rests upon revelation as its proper and principal source, which from the Council of Trent, session 4, we know "to be the source of all saving truth and discipline of morals" and "to be contained in written books and in unwritten traditions"; as upon a subordinate source it rests upon reason, which deduces conclusions from these.

1. Sacred Scripture. For "all Scripture, divinely inspired, is useful for teaching, for arguing, for correcting, for instructing in justice, that the man of God may be perfect, furnished for every good work" (II Tim. III, 16-17). For Scripture provides, as Leo XIII says (Providentissimus), "full precepts of holiness, exhortations seasoned with sweetness and force, examples outstanding in every kind of virtue; there is added, with the name and words of God Himself, the most weighty promise of rewards unto eternity, and the denunciation of punishments."

It hands down:

1. The fundamental notions and principles of morality in the perfect clarity of light.

2. Moral truths, not systematically as in a manual, but as the doctrine of God or of His legates, or as a practical norm for some or for all, or under the form of prayers, oracles of wisdom, promises, punishments, or praise and approval of persons.

3. Examples also of moral life, and certain cases practically solved.

Yet it is to be noted: a) that the doctrine of the Old Law is more imperfect than in the New Testament (Ezech. XX, 25; Gal. IV, 9);

b) that the ceremonial and judicial precepts of the law, by difference from the moral precepts, were to be abolished in the New Law;

c) that examples of the saints are not always commended by Scripture, nor are they always to be approved, since error in their moral life was possible;

d) that in the New Testament revealed moral doctrine could grow until the death of the apostles; thereafter there was present only a fuller recognition, explanation, and fecundation of the same doctrine, namely, by adapting it to diverse nations, cultures, questions, and necessities of times;

e) that mere counsels must be carefully distinguished from precepts strictly so called;

f) that certain things are also reported which are only particular and temporary statutes, as for example Acts XV, 28.

2. Divine Tradition, which, if it is doctrinal, directly; if merely practical or disciplinary, only indirectly makes moral science known, insofar as doctrine can be deduced from it.

It completes the Scriptures: moral norms, especially as regards the worship of God, from the beginning were handed down orally rather than in writing. It also confers firmness and interpretation upon the written word, because it certifies its divine authority and right sense.

3. The decisions of the Supreme Pontiffs, namely, infallible definitions concerning revealed or natural practical truths; condemned theses; practical laws established for the universal Church, which, even if they should not seem opportune to someone, cannot be evil or perverse, since that would be repugnant to the holiness of the Church; finally, the decisions of the Roman Congregations, which not only establish ecclesiastical laws, but also authentically interpret natural or divine law.

4. The decrees of ecumenical councils, whether they are infallible doctrinal definitions or disciplinary laws or decrees; likewise the decrees of particular councils, especially if they have been universally received.

5. The sense and practice of the Church, which become known either from the exercise of the ordinary magisterium of the Pontiffs and bishops in universal preaching or catechetical doctrine, or from the liturgy, piety, morals, custom, and life of the Church herself.

6. The unanimous consensus of the Fathers in moral questions, if they attest the doctrine of the Church itself, or if the Church confirms some doctrine of theirs in particular; otherwise to depart from their unanimous opinion would be nothing but temerarious.

7. The unanimous consensus of theologians, in the same way and under the same conditions as we have stated for the Fathers.

But it is to be noted: a) that the general approval of some Doctor, by which his doctrine is proclaimed as conformable to the doctrine of the Church, does not therefore have force for absolutely every single point; b) that special approval was given to St. Thomas on account of his authority in all theology, even moral theology, far eminent above all, by which he merited to be declared the heavenly patron of all Catholic schools and the common doctor of the whole Church, so that one must always adhere to his principles and in all things recur to his principles; c) that in the practical order the doctrine of St. Alphonsus also was specially approved, insofar as those who generally follow all his opinions are not to be disturbed; yet without those being reprehended who follow opinions handed down by other approved authors (Sacred Penitentiary, July 5, 1831).

1. Human reason, which deduces conclusions from revealed practical principles, or demonstrates and illustrates natural moral truths, and from both makes applications.

Revelation itself teaches that reason is the proximate norm of morality, which is indicated by nature as such; whence moral theology must also consider the principles and conclusions of reason. Moreover, in order that moral discipline rule life, it must hand down not only general norms, but also descend to the concrete practice of private life; this is altogether impossible without rational knowledge and its use.

2. The science of philosophers, which serves theology, especially of those who cultivate ethics, and the other related human disciplines which bring assistance, such as juridical, social, and economic disciplines.

3. History, especially of the Church and of theology, of human moral science, of canon and civil law.

8. History of Moral Theology

The history of moral theology is divided into three epochs, according to the history of human culture. Moral doctrine indeed remained the same in its general principles and rules, but its knowledge and proposition were diverse. Systematic science itself did not exist from the beginning, but in the course of the centuries was slowly elaborated.

Besides special works, Bouquillon, Fundamental Moral Theology; likewise Koch, Mausbach, Prummer, and Vermeersch in their manuals, can be consulted.

I. The origin and beginnings of moral theology are in the age of antiquity and of the Fathers. The first testimonies for the most part are of edification, pronounced in a popular style, and given as occasion offered by way of instruction, exhortation, or application; only exceptionally, against false systems, do scientific dissertations concerning moral matter sometimes exist.

1. Before the Council of Nicaea, during the persecution, Christian ethics, conformably to the ascetical method, has a practical and parenetic character. Thus the Didache, or Teaching of the Apostles, setting forth the two ways (of life and death) and various admonitions, is a brief summary of moral doctrine; and the Shepherd of Hermas hands down twelve commandments in order to penitential practice. To these afterward were added those parts of the Apostolic Constitutions which reach back to this time.

Scientific exposition began in the Alexandrian catechetical school. Clement of Alexandria in the Paedagogus hands down an almost complete ethics; and in the book Stromata he philosophically investigates fundamental moral rules and defends them against pagan science and laxism. In the West Tertullian arises, whose moral writings present an aspect at once philosophical, juridical, and religious. Each is endowed with a rather rigorous spirit; the writings of St. Cyprian are more balanced and clearer.

2. The greater Fathers, after Nicaea, in sermons, commentaries on Scripture, letters, and special moral works, left abundant matter for the future science. Many wrote specifically on virginity: Gregory of Nyssa, Chrysostom, Methodius, Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine; Ambrose wrote on the duties of clerics; Chrysostom on the priesthood. The writings of St. Augustine were of the greatest moment for moral matters, such as: On the Morals of the Catholic Church; On the Work of Monks; On the Good of Marriage; Against Lying. He deeply expounded the philosophical character of ethics, the intimate nature of supernatural ethics, and the psychological and ascetical realization of perfect moral life, while at the same time handing down many useful things in mystical and casuistic matters.

After him the most noted is St. Gregory the Great, whose writing On Pastoral Care was, as it were, the first casuistic theology, and who through his letters and the most celebrated work Moralia constituted a primary source of ascetical science for the time of the Middle Ages, in the same way as Dionysius the Mystic furnished the primary source of mystical science. They exercised an immense influence upon the following age.

II. The very construction of the edifice of Christian moral science was made by the Scholastics, in the time of the Middle Ages. At the beginning the writers are wholly engaged in collecting the sentences of the Fathers; various books of sentences appeared after the manner of Isidore of Seville and John Damascene. The joining together of moral and juridical matter was promoted by the penitential precepts of the Church, which were collected and ordered in penitential books both in the East and in the West.

From the eleventh century, in all theology a more penetrating intellectual method came to be used, which reached its height in the thirteenth century, no less for the moral part than for the dogmatic. Thus the scientific exposition of moral doctrine was separated from mystical and casuistic exposition.

The Book of Sentences of Peter Lombard is the textbook upon which even the greatest doctors wrote commentaries, such as St. Albert the Great, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, Scotus, Giles of Rome, and others after them. Theological summas were elaborated by William of Auxerre, by Alexander of Hales, by St. Thomas, two by Albert the Great, and by Henry of Ghent. In all these works they unite moral and dogmatic theology, and to the positive documents of Scripture and the Fathers they join rational and speculative foundations, upon which they chiefly insist according to the dialectical form and scholastic method. To the primitive tendency, which was rather Platonic-Augustinian, there succeeded the Aristotelian-Thomistic, which uses a sounder and deeper philosophy to illustrate revealed doctrine. The most perfect work, not yet surpassed, is the Summa Theologica of Aquinas, which stands forth among all by synthetic unity together with amplitude of doctrine, psychological keenness of genius, metaphysical depth, and measured judgment concerning even practical and juridical matters.

The doctrine of St. Thomas was attacked by the Scotistic school, from which arose Nominalism, which brought Scholasticism almost to ruin.

They also published special writings on virtues and vices, for example William Peraldus and Hervaeus Natalis; William of Auvergne and John Gerson wrote various moral treatises. At the end of the Middle Ages stands St. Antoninus, displaying in his Theological Summa scholastic art together with casuistry.

Ascetical and mystical theology generally remains under the influence of Augustine, Dionysius, and Gregory the Great; it was especially cultivated by Hugh and Richard of St. Victor, St. Bernard, Eckhart, Tauler, Suso, Ruusbroec, Dionysius the Carthusian, and Thomas a Kempis.

Collections of canons and penitential precepts furnished the occasion for exercising the casuistic-juridical method. Many moral summas of cases and penitential summas appeared, in which a great part is pastoral or canonical. The more celebrated is the summa of St. Raymond of Pennafort; after him Astesanus, Angelus de Clavasio, St. Antoninus, Sylvester Prierias, Tabiena, and Bartholomaeus Fumus deserve to be recalled.

III. From the time of the Council of Trent a new theological flowering arose: in Spain, at Salamanca, under the leadership of Francisco de Victoria, Melchior Cano, and Dominic Soto; in Italy, where Thomas de Vio Cajetan had already flourished earlier, who, second to none in commenting on St. Thomas, also published several practical writings.

From this time in the schools they commented on the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas. Commentaries upon it were written, among others, by Seraphinus a Porrecta, Bannez together with Bartholomew de Medina, Sylvius, Arauxo, John of St. Thomas, the Salmanticenses, Gonet, Billuart, etc., all of whom pertain to the Thomistic school; likewise from the Society of Jesus: Toletus, Gregory of Valencia, Vasquez, Suarez, Tanner, Arriaga, etc.; also the doctors of the Sorbonne: Gammachaeus and Ysambert. Others followed Scotus.

Moral monographs of greater bulk were published: Suarez wrote on Laws and on Virtue and the State of Religion; Molina, Dominic Soto, Lessius, and Lugo wrote on Right and Justice, touching also questions of natural right, in which Francisco de Victoria had already gone before them.

Apologists and polemicists, such as Eck, the great Louvain theologians, Bellarmine, Becanus, and Bossuet, vindicate not only dogma but also Catholic morals.

At the end of the sixteenth century, moral discipline began to be handed down separately from dogmatic theology. Thus, for example, Azor, Thomas Sanchez, Peter de Ledesma, Laymann, Castropalao, Bonacina, Candidus, Sayrus, Sporer, Amort; afterward Martinez de Prado, Reiffenstuel, Lacroix, the moral Salmanticenses, Roncaglia, Cuniliati, Concina, Patuzzi.

This was the occasion of cultivating principles less, and of following the casuistic method, so that moral works were filled with many cases and practical observations. Thus arose very many collections of cases, marrow-books, directories of confessors, etc.; known to all are Azpilcueta Navarrus, Busembaum, Elbel, Wigandt, etc.

Ascetical and mystical theology came forth in innumerable writings. The more celebrated are held to be Louis of Blois, Louis of Granada, St. John of the Cross and St. Teresa, St. Francis de Sales, and finally St. Alphonsus.

From the middle of the seventeenth century a great controversy concerning the formation of conscience and the use of probable opinions flourished among Rigorists and Laxists, Probabiliorists and Probabilists, until St. Alphonsus, led by zeal for holy peace together with a balanced and practical genius, showed, at least for many questions, a middle way by which generally we can proceed safely in practice.

Now the unhappy process of separating moral theology from dogmatic theology, the preponderance given to the casuistic method, and the sharp controversy among moralists, together with political upheavals, brought theological morals to ruin.

In the most recent times, however, theological science has been restored, even in its moral part. They return to positive and supernatural ethics; and, with the Pontiffs promoting this from Leo XIII onward, also to the scholastic theology of St. Thomas. Many excellent manuals have been published, whose catalogue it seems rather idle to make. Yet larger and truly scientific works on moral matters are still very much lacking. And if the return to scholastic theology has borne fruit in dogmatic matters, that this has not yet sufficiently happened for the moral part is clear to the eyes of all. Outside the Thomistic school, in which the Summa Theologica is usually subjected to commentary throughout, that harmful separation of dogmatic and moral theology, of speculative and practical theology, always persists, which harms the deeper and truly scientific study of practical doctrine.

Three duties now seem incumbent upon moralists: 1. that, with the scholastic method restored, they strive to perfect rational investigation more fully and to inspect more the intrinsic reason of things; 2. that they treat not only of sins, especially mortal sins, but also set forth the doctrine concerning virtues, even in those matters which are of perfection or counsel; 3. that they attend more to new facts and present-day necessities, which have arisen from psychological, political, social, or economic conditions, and pursue more accurate solutions.

Bibliography. For the whole general part the following can usefully be consulted:

1. St. Thomas, with the commentaries of Cajetan, Medina, John of St. Thomas, Sylvius, the Salmanticenses, Billuart.

2. From the philosophers: Goudin, Roselli, Zigliara, Gredt, Neo-Scholastic Philosophy (of the Louvain school) in the noted manuals; among special works: Meyer, Institutions of Natural Right; Cathrein, Moral Philosophy; Beysens, Ethics or Moral Doctrine; Lehu, Moral and Social Philosophy; De Bie, Moral Philosophy; Van Hoonacker, Moral Philosophy; Sertillanges, The Moral Philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas; Wittmann, Ethics; E. Janssens, Course of General Morals; Van Oorschot, Principles of Christian Moral Doctrine.

3. From more recent theologians: Bouquillon, Fundamental Moral Theology; Raphael of St. Joseph, Fundamental Institutions of Moral Theology, and other general works known to all, such as Ballerini, Lehmkuhl, Noldin, and Vermeersch; Haine, Mechlin Theology, and Tanquerey; Prummer; Goepfert, Mausbach, and Schilling.

4. From historiographers: De la Barre, Morals According to St. Thomas Aquinas; Dom Lottin, The Elements of the Morality of Acts in St. Thomas Aquinas; Wittmann, The Ethics of St. Thomas Aquinas.

5. From sacred orators: Janvier, Conferences of Notre-Dame.