|
| Strange Question |
|
| |
3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Frequently when I write the word "morality," someone comments on my blog: "Whose morality?" That comment implies that individuals or groups of people determine their own morality. I wonder if the commenters really believe that.
Is there such a thing as thiefs' morality? How about sex offenders' morality? Was there Nazi morality? Is there street gang morality? Or hit man morality? Have you ever heard of liars' morality? No! Those people are practicing immorality, not morality.
Morality is not some vague myth. Right and wrong is written on the human heart. When we do immoral acts our conscience makes sure we know it. Sure, we may move into denial and self-justification, but that doesn't change the facts of our wrongful behavior.
If you examine human history, you will see that there is vast agreement among diverse human cultures and societies and religions as to right and wrong. Things like murder, stealing, lying, incest, child abuse, rape, cheating, sexual perversion, fraud, and adultery, have been considered wrong by almost every human culture.
So whose morality am I referring to? The morality that has been revealed to mankind by our Creator.
|
|
| To add a comment to "Strange Question" |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
 |
|
|
 [star!] |
Amen brother ;o) |
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| I like how you say it. Morality is written on the human heart. We know it when we see it. |
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
2:14 When Gentiles who have not the law do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. 2:15 They show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them |
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
Nice one Steve |
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| America has become Morally bankrupt. Starting at the residency of the White House the morals now fit the outhouse. What about the republican senator playing footsie with an under cover cop? It's a two party corruption, the democrats are better at it. |
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
| [star!] |
|
|
|
| June 05, 2009 |
|
|
|
I agree, morality isn't necessarily vague. However, I do remember when I was studying moral theology our professor, who was the Prior of the Abbey and whose name was Peter constantly used the expression, "it all depends". The phrase came to be known affectionately as "the Prior Principle". Prior Peter explained that morals, while not apart from objective truth, often have compounding details that may appear contrary to objective truth.
For example, the commandment of thou shalt not steal does not apply to someone who takes a loaf of bread for his starving children. Objectively stealing is "immoral" but situationally, if there is no other way to feed the children then the bread in that instance becomes "common property" and doesn't belong to anyone, therefore the man is not culpable, he has not sinned, by taking the bread.
Additionally, as you stated, God's law has been put onto the hearts of all, and so it is safe to say that only those laws that are accepted among all religious traditions are divine and those accepted among a few are human and these may be flawed. For example, God's law states thou shalt not kill. There are no exceptions anywhere in the New Testament for this. So the only logical conclusion is that Christians cannot, for any reason, kill. This has to be applied broadly so no Christian can justify abortion, mercy killing, warfare or any social injustice. Christians who support war but "defend life" fail in a consistant life ethic which is not divine in character.
Sorry to be so long, but there are instances where things are black and white but the majority of moral choices are shades of gray in character. We are constantly seeking to understand God's will, it's a journey, not an end. |
|
|
| June 06, 2009 |
|
|
|
Fr. Vincent:
"It all depends" represents moral realitivity, commonly known as situational ethics; and is not Biblical. Our needs do not trump God's commands. According to your logic about stealing, you can say that if a man needs sexual relief and there is no other way to get it, he is justified having sex without marriage.
A many with a hungry family is not justified in stealing. He may choose to sin to feed his children, but it is still stealing and still a sin. Besides, stealing is seldom someone's only option because a person can always ask for bread. |
|
|
Follow this blog
