Basic Assumptions on Christian Morality
Formation in Morality is at the forefront of the
development of the faith of a Christian. To live a moral
life entails that Christians conform to the life and
teachings of Jesus. However, for them to live a moral
life, it is crucial that they understand what morality is and
to unlearn all sorts of misconceptions. For a clear
understanding of morality, one is able to ascertain what
action is appropriate and necessary for a certain
circumstance. With this, the concept of morality must be
very clear to the human person since this will be his/her
very guide for his/her day to day living.
Before going to the unique or specified Christian
sources of morality this lesson will first present the basic
concepts on how Christians arrived with their different
general moral norms so that we will be able to connect
the different concepts or norms of morality laid for the
human person.
The Descriptive title of our course is Christian Morality
in Our Times. First and foremost, we have to ask what
is Morality? Basically, Morality is connected with norms.
So, the next step is to ask if what is a norm?
Norm is a fundamental concept in the social sciences. It
is commonly defined as rules or standards that are
socially enforced. In the ancient times, when there were
no formal social structures such as government and the
Church; or when the different religions were not yet as
organized as they are now, norms often come in the
forms of customs, rituals, and traditions. This was so
since people would easily follow these standards if it
becomes part of their life-styles until it becomes part of
their way of living. In the Philippine context, respecting
one’s parents would be taught by saying “po” or “opo”
to them, or by the practice of “pagmamano”. Norms
would only come in the forms of rules, regulations, or
technically called law when society became more
socially organized in their government systems. When
different societies mature or develop, their moral
standards would also become more organized, more so
when they realized how important is the laying out of the
rules to govern human actions for the sustenance of the
peace and order in society which will pave the way for
more social progress and further developments. So,
what is “Morality” in a more technical definition?
Morality is a science that deals with the “quality”
(goodness
or
badness)
of
human
acts/actions. “science” generally means a field of
study. So, Morality will judge whether a certain act or
action is good or bad. How does morality judge human
acts/actions? Morality needs basis/bases which are the
rules or standards or technically called Law. In general,
these rules or standards or laws are called Norms.
Our next question is, how did morality arrive with these
norms? If the human person came up with these norms
or found these norms by thinking deeply/ reflecting or
so, called philosophizing, then the process or the
science is called Moral Philosophy. In other situations,
if the norms or rules were given or revealed by God or
the Divine being, the science is called Moral
Theology. What is the difference between the two?
Moral Philosophy found out the norms or rules by using
purely human reasoning or called philosophizing, while
in Moral Theology, these rules or norms were given or
revealed by God. An example of norms in Moral
Theology is the Ten Commandments. So Moral
Philosophy relies on pure reasoning/deeply thinking
while Moral Theology would depend on God’s revelation
and faith. Aside from Philosophizing and God’s
revelation, let us try to find out how others come up with
norms for the human person .
Sources of Norms:
Three Bases in coming up with a good/right norm for
human act/ human life: Knowing the Origin, Nature and
the End/Destiny of the human person.
The concepts of the Origin, Nature, and the Destiny of
the Human Person and their serious implications in
coming up with moral norms.
1. The Concept of the Origin of the Human Person
and all things that surround him/her.
Origin: → God (man is a creature of God)
→ Apes (man came from apes)
Most if not all religions would strongly believe that all
creation and the human person came from a creator
which we call “God” whether you call that God YHWH,
Allah, Brahman, Bathala, Kabuniyan or what so ever
term which would indicate being all-powerful and other
traits expected of a supreme being.
Outside the realm of beliefs, some would strongly
propose other theories for the origin of the human
person such as the theories that the human person
evolved from other creatures or animals or even product
of purely natural happenings.
Serious Implications to Morality:
If you believe that the human person originated from a
supreme being called “God”, then it follows that your
moral norms/laws will depend on the characteristics of
that “God”; or that “God” will be the one to command or
give norms to the human person. An example of this is
the 10 Commandments in the case of Judaism or
Christianity. The moral laws will greatly respect the
dignity of that “God” and the human person whom He
also created. There is what you call “fear of the Lord” as
pat of your moral norms.
For the second concept of the origin of the human
person which suggests that we evolved from other
animals or just product of purely natural events, its
moral norms will just depend on the nature of the human
person which will just be purely animal. With this, there
will be no higher dignity for the person to be respected
and there will also be no fear or respect for a higher
being or higher authority which is called “God”. So, you
can just do whatever you want such as easily
manipulating others even to the point of killing fellow
human persons since you may think that man is the
highest authority on earth.
2. Human Nature / Natural law (since man is part
of the whole nature or Creation)
The same with the concept of the origin of the human
person, one’s concept/view of the nature of the human
person will also dictate what set of moral norms is being
set to be followed or lived by us humans.
Serious Implications to Morality:
As being explained above in the concept of the origin of
all things, if you believe that we are both bodily and
spiritual beings since we are creations of God, then our
moral norms will flow from such concept, and if you just
believe that we are purely animals, then our moral
norms will also flow from such view like treating us as
purely animals.
3. Destiny / End / or the Ultimate Goal of human
life
Different religions commonly believe that as we were
created by a higher being or called supreme being, we
also have a good destiny prepared for us. We commonly
believe that there is a life after the death of our physical
aspect. This is called “heaven” in Christianity, and other
religions have also their own terms for such a destiny
for the human person.
On the other way around, other people who do not
believe in beings that are higher than the human person
will just say that there is no such thing as life after death.
Death is the ultimate end of the human persons.
Serious Implications to Morality:
The same with the case of the concept of the origin of
all, the view for the end/destiny of the human person will
also dictate what set of moral norms is being laid for us.
If you strongly believe in the life after death and going
there at the end of life requires good moral life, then we
have to do good in our lives to be able to attained such
destiny. On the other hand, if there is no noble
end/destiny for the human person, then there are no
such thing as moral norms. There will be norms but they
will greatly depend on the concept of the people who
can manipulate the others.
With the presentation of the different sources of moral
norms, I hope it now clear to us why there are norms or
laws which we find not compatible what we believe
especially with our views on the origin and the destiny
for the human person. There are also norms/laws which
we find not compatible with our basic nature as human
persons. These norms which we strongly believe as not
good for us are what we call misconceptions on
morality. So, coming up with “wrong” norms is a product
of
one’s
misconceptions
of
morality.
The
misconceptions on morality are just product of the
“wrong” concept of the origin, nature, and the destiny for
the human person.
Summarizing what is being discussed above, morality is
centered on norms use to judge human acts/actions or
other practices of society whether they are good or bad.
The nearest and best basis to come up with moral
norms is the nature of the human person and his/her
surroundings/environment since for some people, the
origin and destiny for the human person is still unclear
or for them others’ belief on those matters is
unacceptable.
As stated in the beginning of this discussion, for us
Christians, the two basic ways on how we arrived with
our moral norms are Philosophy (Moral Philosophy) and
Theology (Moral Theology). Formally defining the two
will be as follows: Moral Philosophy studies the
goodness and badness of human actions in the light of
the highest principles based on human reason
alone while Moral Theology studies the goodness and
badness of human actions in the light of revelation (in
the light of Christian faith to attain his final goal).
Our course Christian Morality is based on both Moral
Philosophy and Moral Theology. Christian Norms are
product of these two fields of science.
Human Nature/The Human Person
Who or what is the Human person based on Nature?
Since the actions of the human person flows from what
he/she is, we need to discuss his/her nature by
enumerating its essential characteristics.
 Rational being – The human person has
intellect/mind/reason. He/she discovers things
by reason, and he/she is the only animal who
knows that he/she knows. He/she thinks,
rationalize, reflect and other activities of the
intellect.
 Free-will – The human person is free/ has
freedom which means he/she has two or more
options or choices and also has will which is the
power to act or not to act on his/her choices.
Will is the power to do or not to do or to act or
not to act.
 Conscience – is the practical judgment of the
intellect on what is good or what is bad, and is
prompting the person to always do/follow what
is good.
 Loving being – Aside from the love between
opposite sex which is designed for the
continuity of the human species, generally,
loving means desiring the good of others.
 Body - Person – We have a flesh (physical
part), which connects us to the material world.
Our bodies(physical part) is dependent on
nature/earth. Our bodies use the elements of
the earth. The death of mother earth will also be
the death of our bodies.
 Sexual – refers to being male or female which
is intended for companionship and pro-creation.




Unique though Social – We are individuals
and need independence but we are also social
being: live with others. These two are
inseparable. We are individuals and need
independence but we also need the presence
of others to complete ourselves.
Historical – We have a continuity with the past.
Transcendental – We always aim higher, to
surpass our achievements, since we are
longing
for
completeness
or
total
satisfaction/contentment. This also means that
the human person has. . .
Metaphysical (meta = beyond) aspects such
as intellect, emotion, conscience and others.




What is the Implication of the Human Nature to
Morality? Going direct to the point, what does your
nature has to say to your actions? As we have stated
above, our actions flow from our nature. Example, if you
are historical beings, then you must learn from your past
experiences; if you are a loving being, you must always
desire what is good for others; if you are a rational
being, then think before you act; if you are
transcendental, then you are not satisfied with your
present achievements, or it will lead us to ask and reflect
that if we are transcendental, are we heading to a
certain destiny?; if we are body persons, do we need to
take care of mother earth? and the likes. Among these
traits of the nature of the human person, which should
regulate
the
others
and
his/her
human
actions/decisions?
Among the nine traits stated above, the one which
should always regulate the others or human actions
which proceed from the other traits is Conscience. This
is because using the other traits like intellect or freewill
alone without the intervention of Conscience can lead to
misuse, or abuse of human actions. Example is
thinking, if you are problematic, you can think of some
bad actions as a solution to your problems which in the
end is not the case, but it will just add or complicate your
problem.
Since we are Christians who strongly believe in the
existence of a Creator (Theos or God) as the origin of
all and the proper destiny which this Creator prepared
for us, we also need to look at the other traits of the
human person based on this perspective.
Who/What is the human person in a Theological
Perspective/View?
 Masterpiece of God (God’s Image and
likeness): If we are the image and likeness of
God, means we reflect some of the important
characteristics of this God such as goodness,
loving, just, compassionate and many others.
So, if God is good, then basically we are also
good; if God is just, we are also basically just,
and others.
 Fundamentally/innately good or moral
being: No human person is bad or evil, only our





wrong actions are bad or evil and not the human
person.
God’s partner / “co-creators” of God. God
created the world and us as “incomplete” or
imperfect so our mission is to develop or bring
ourselves and our world to perfection. This is
why we are called stewards of God’s creation.
Part of our being “co-creators” of God is our
being sexual (male or female) which is
designed for
pro-creation.
Rational being – has intellect or reasoning or
mind.
Freewill – has freedom and will which he/she
can use to act or not to act.
Brother’s keeper (social, and communal): we
need to take care of others aside from
ourselves.
Weak / has fallen nature/ “brokenness”: This is
called original sin in Theology. In other terms
we may call this being “incomplete”, or
“unfinished”. From this being incomplete comes
your mission which is to finish or complete
yourselves. Point for reflection: What if God
created us as perfect beings, what will you do?
Graced: this means we are aided/being
assisted by God in our journey of bringing
ourselves to perfection. In the Catholic Church,
God’s grace will come to us through the Seven
Sacraments and our other ways of connecting
with our Creator.
Transcendental: this pushes us to look for the
ultimate meaning of life and ultimately to our
God.
Children/family of God. We belong to the
family of God, formally through Baptism.
Destined for the Kingdom. We have our
destiny which we commonly call “heaven” or
“paradise” or in Jesus’ words called the
Kingdom of God.
Basically, most of these traits of the human person in
this Theological respective are the same with those
traits based on Nature since these are parts of the basic
nature of the human person. There are just other traits
which are rooted in our connectedness with our Creator.
So, for its relevance to Morality, we have to ask the
same question, what do these traits of the human
person in the Theological view say on how he/she
should act or live? The same answer, that these traits
of the human person should strongly influence how
he/she acts or live his/her life. In the formulation of
specific norms for
the
human
person, these
traits should be strongly considered since these are the
ones which will help direct the human person to
perfection/completeness or to his/her proper destiny
which we call the Kingdom of God. The same
clarification also that why do we need to formulate
norms/rules/laws for the human person if his/her nature
should influence his/her actions? Well, there are many
people who abuse their other faculties like
mind/intellect, freedom and others, and they also ignore
the very basic and immediate norm which
is Conscience. This is why there are many norms or set
of norms laid for the good of the human person and one
of the very basic set of norms is the Ten
Commandments.
With this, we hope that the sources of the norms of
Morality is now very clear to us. For a kind of widening
of horizon, let us look on the other views on the destiny
for the human person since we also said earlier that the
concept of the destiny is also one of the sources of the
norms of morality.
Some views on the Ultimate End/Destiny of the
Human Person
Most if not all of these other views or concept of the
destiny for the human person are just product of
philosophizing (Philosophy).
human actions or for his/her way of living. As we have
said in our past discussions, “wrong” concept of the
nature and the destiny for the human person cause a lot
of misconceptions about morality and produces a lot of
wrong principles or norms. Examples of these wrong
principles/norms of morality are the following:
1. Morality is a matter of opinion. This means that
moral norms are subjective; depends on the
person.
2. All opinions about morality are equal and
correct. Therefore, all opinions should be
followed.
3. Morality is outside the world of practical people.
Whatever impractical is not good.
4. Morality develops guilt and moral obligation
which makes life unhappy. So, we need to set
aside moral norms.
Basic Concepts in Morality
Hedonism
For this Philosophy, the ultimate goal for the human
person is Happiness, and this happiness is found in
pleasure (“sarap)”. So, “kung saan ang masarap’ dun
ang kasiyahan”. This pleasure is sensual. Therefore, for
this certain philosophy, the norm for human action is
to look for pleasure/pleasurable things.
Marxism:
A philosophy by Karl Marx which looks at the human
person as purely material being or from mater and there
are no such things as metaphysical aspects such as
soul and also God. This view just focused on the way of
governance since it was more of a reaction to the
abuses of the democratic and other forms of governing
people. For Marxism, the ultimate goal of people is to
have a Classless Society (no rich, no poor). This was
achieved in a communistic form of government.
Development or progress must always be for the
common good / not individualistic.
Norm: Do everything for the common good. Never
mind individual goals or individual progress, set
aside ourselves. “all for one, one for all”.
Nihilism:
For this philosophy, the human person and his/her life
has no ultimate meaning, no ultimate value. If the
human person and life is meaningless or no value at all,
what is your norm for life and for your action? Aside
from having no definite norm, you reflect on the danger
of this kind of philosophy.
Christian view:
For Christianity, the ultimate goal/destiny for the human
person is to enter the Kingdom or to have eternal
union/happiness with God.
Norm: Follow the teachings of God such as the Ten
Commandments and others.
As you may have noticed in our discussion, the view of
the nature of the human person and his/her ultimate
destiny plays a very crucial role in laying out norms for
Morality is an encompassing concept that serves as
the underlying force for every action of an individual and
of a society. Morality takes the crucial role of
formulating, establishing and setting ethical norms of
conduct that govern behaviors and actions of an
individual or group of individuals in order to achieve
harmony, unity, and order within a society.
Purposes of Morality:
Why do we need to follow certain standards or set of
norms? In our past discussions, we answered this by
saying that we need norms since some of the faculties
of the human person like freedom and is/her passions
can be exercised in an abusive manner or even
destructive to the person himself/herself and to others.
Going deeper, why do we need to use our faculties in a
wise or good way? Will it lead us to a higher end? This
will tell us that there are noble reasons why we need to
follow set of norms which are the following below:
1. For the Fullness of Freedom ---- for the human
person to be totally free.
God created the human person as a rational being,
conferring him/her the dignity of an individual who can
initiate and control his/her actions. God willed that
man/woman should be ‘left in the hand of his/her own
counsel’ so that she/he will, of his/her own accord, seek
his/her Creator and freely attain his/her full blessed
perfection. Man/Woman is “rational and, therefore, like
God. He/She is created with free will and is master over
his/her acts.” So, norms are not prohibitions or
imprisonment for the human person but are guide for
him/her to be totally free. To clarify this, what will
happen to you if you do whatever you want? This is the
youngs’ perception of freedom. If I will do whatever I
want, like I will just steal others’ property or even kill
someone, what will happen to me? It is either I will end
up in the prison cell or I will go hiding. Doing whatever I
want will make me unfree. So, freedom does not mean I
will do whatever I want, but I will always do anything
so long as it is good for me and for others. Freedom
is aimed at the perfection of the human person.
2. A guide to the Fullness of Human Development
Moral development is part of human development.
Moral development is the process through which
children develop proper attitudes and behaviors toward
other people in society, based on social and cultural
norms, rules, and laws.
Moral development is a concern for every parent.
Teaching a child to distinguish right from wrong and to
behave accordingly is a goal of parenting.
Moral development is a complex issue that—since the
beginning of human civilization—has been a topic of
discussion among some of the world's most
distinguished psychologists, theologians, and culture
theorists.
Material progress which does not follow moral norms
and which others still consider as development is not
really so. Examples of this are the jets fighters, bombs,
and others. These are not really developments but are
aimed for destruction; destruction of human lives or
destruction of things, and nature.
So, developments whether scientific, social, economic
and others should always follow norms of morality or
else, they are aimed for destruction of many things as
mentioned above.
3. A Guide towards Reality (truth of things, life)
Morality is a guide for the human person to discover
reality or the truth of things, and of life. This will lead the
human person to discover the hierarchy of values until
the ultimate value of life and of all things. So, this will
help the human person to set his/her priorities in life until
her/his attainment of the ultimate goal which is the
eternal union and happiness with his/her Creator
4. A Guide towards Meaning of Life
As mentioned above, morality or always doing good will
allow the human person to discover the real value of
things and life which at the end will let him/her
experience the true meaning of life.
5. The Entrance of Eternal Life into the Life of the
Human Person
After following the moral norms, discovering the truth
and real value of all things, and bringing himself/herself
to perfection, the human person will be able to reach
his/her final destiny which is to enter the kingdom of
God. Morality reveals and leads the human person to
his/her ultimate end/destiny.
After finding out the Purposes of Morality, let us go back
to the causes why there is morality. Although, these
were implied in the discussions above, we will
enumerate and briefly explain them for clarification
purpose.
Morality Presupposes the following:
1. The existence of God
Morality points us to the existence of the Creator of all
things who is totally good and perfect and whom we call
“God”. Since this Creator is totally good or perfect,
He/She also gave us a guide to attain total goodness or
perfection.
2. Intellect and Free Will
Intellect, freedom, will, and passions needs moral
norms so for them not to be abuse, misuse or overuse.
3. Ultimate Destiny
As discussed above, moral norms are guides for the
human person to attain his/her ultimate destiny which is
the Kingdom of God or eternal happiness with God.
4. Accountability to an Ultimate value
Morality tells us that there are ultimate values or ends
that we will be accountable (responsible) or we will face
the consequence later if we do not follow the norms.
This ultimate value is our final destiny which is the
Kingdom of God.
Object of Morality
We have been talking about norms, rules, standards or
laws of which is being use by morality to judge our
actions. To clarify this, what does morality judge as
good or bad? Is it the human person or his actions? It is
the action of the human person. To be very specific,
what kind of action needs to be judge as good or bad?
There are two kinds of acts which are the socalled human acts and acts of man. Which of these two
should be moralized? While human acts and acts of
man both pertain to the actions or behaviors of an
individual or group of individuals, they must be clearly
delineated in order to discern which brings moral
responsibility.
Human Acts are actions that are proper to humans,
thus the crucial element of willful consent and
knowledge of the action must be present. One
must freely use his/her intellect and freewill when
acting. Human acts reveal the value of responsibility or
accountability. Eating healthy foods, reading notes in
preparation for an exam, and saying no to drugs are just
few examples.
Acts of Man are the actions that do not reflect the
person as a rational being. The actions are
performed without conscious
deliberation
or knowledge and with the absence of freewill. Acts of
man constitute unconscious and involuntary actions.
Examples are one’s way of sleeping, suddenly catching
a falling object, one’s way of walking, reacting
instinctively when touching a very hot surface, and the
likes. These are done without the use of freewill and
reason. Some of these just happen naturally as
automatic responses to the situations.
Human Acts
Deliberate
Free
Voluntary
Conscious
Willful
Known
Aware
Acts of Man
Indeliberate
Not Free
involuntary
unconscious
unwilful
unknown
unaware
CONSTITUENTS OF HUMAN ACTS
1. Human acts are known and deliberate. An
individual, as the moral agent, has full knowledge
in doing a certain action. There is a prior
knowledge and a deliberate evaluation whether to
do an action or not.
2. Human acts are free. An individual as the moral
agent is free from any external factors as well as
internal pressure to do the act. He/She is neither
forced nor intimidated to do or not to do something.
3. Human acts are voluntary. The action proceeds
from the willingness of an individual to perform
action with a perceived knowledge of the end.
With the given distinction above, it is now very clear that
we cannot moralize acts of man but the Human Acts
Morality therefore covers human acts and not acts of
man.
Determinants of Morality
What we moralize or judge as good or bad is the human
act and not the acts of man nor the person who is the
doer of the action. In the ancient time when there were
no formulated norms yet which we now call law/s, what
were their bases or norms to judge people’s actions or
practices?
Let us first look at the etymology of the word morality or
moral. The word “moral” originated from the Latin word
“mores” which means manner or custom/s which are
widely used within a particular society or culture. So, the
norms for people at that time were the established
practices called customs. Example in the Philippine
context, people do not state the rule such as “honor your
parents/elders” but they teach us the customs on how
to do such like saying “po or opo” or “pagmamano” and
others. Even in ways of dressing, our elders had their
customs on how to do it to be respectful and others. So,
it is now clear to us that the customs set by our elders
before were the norms for people to live a good life and
to have a good relationship with one another. From its
etymology, moral means good, if you put a prefix
“im”, immoral means bad. There are actions which
are generally not judge as good nor bad, this is
called amoral or indifferent act. Amoral or indifferent
acts are the same with the acts of man. Therefore, if you
follow the norms of society which in the ancient time
were customs, traditions, and other practices, then your
action is good, if not then what you are doing is bad.
What is lacking on the norms set by our elders during
their time? They are just general guidelines on how
people should live a good life and how to sustain good
relationship with each other. There is no criteria on how
are we going to moralize or judge very specific human
actions to see if they are really good or bad. Even most
of our laws today are still too general as bases to
moralize human actions. They cannot give an exact
judgment or exact amount or degree of reward or
penalty which corresponds to the action committed.
With this, we need specific criteria.
Elements In Determining The Morality Of Human
Acts
There are three determinants of morality for us to
assess the quality of human actions.
1. The Act (The Object)
There are actions that the act itself will reveal if it is good
or bad. There is no need for norms or rules to base on
to see their quality. Examples: Killing, stealing,
cheating.; these acts are clearly or obviously bad.
Praying, attending the Holy Mass; these actions are
obviously good.
2. Purpose or Intention (The End of the act) –
WHY?
A lot of our action is done with an intention or purpose –
the reason behind the act. Although generally we do
things with a good intention, there are also instances
where some will really do an action with a bad intention.
Example: helping is generally good, but some people
will help a poor girl with the intention of seducing her;
then, helping which was supposed to be a good action
became bad in that instance. Studying is also good; but
how about studying how to make a bomb to kill people
whom you envy? This is how crucial the intention is as
part of the criteria in moralizing human acts.
3. Circumstance (involves:
place,
time,
person, manner)
This refers to the persons involved, the time,
place, and occasion that surround the act. In other
words, it answers the questions: ‘WHO’, ‘WHEN’,
‘WHERE’ and ‘HOW’. This can change or completely
alter the moral quality of a human act. Circumstance is
a condition modifying human actions, either by
increasing or diminishing the moral responsibility. It
plays an important role in affecting the morality of an
action because human acts are performed at a definite
time and place, in a particular manner, for a certain
reason, etc. All of which, in one way or another, increase
or diminish the responsibility of the action.
Circumstance can make a good action evil, as when a
guard on duty goes to sleep. It can increase or minimize
the guilt of the individual as when a student lies to
his/her teacher when he/she cheats. Since all human
actions occur at a certain time and place,
the circumstance must always be considered in
evaluating the moral quality of any human act.
Principles for Judging the Morality of Human Acts
(application of the three criteria above)
1. An act is morally good if the 3 (Act, Purpose
and Circumstance) are substantially good.
Examples: Helping, Studying, working, etc.
2. If one of the three is evil, the act is evil.
Helping one to steal, studying how to easily kill
someone (what is evil here is the intention)
3. Circumstance may create, mitigate or
aggravate sin/culpability
Circumstance can create, lessen or increase
or even remove one’s culpability (guilt,
penalty)
Example: walking on a newly cemented area
is bad since alam na this, how about if the one
who walked onthat area is a two years old girl?
Will you moralize her action? Of course not.
4. For amoral act or indifferent act, its morality
will be judge by its purpose and circumstance.
Example: throwing a stone, walking, etc. how
about if one intentionally stepped on the newly
cemented area? Obviously, such action is
bad.
5. An act which is intrinsically evil is not morally
allowed regardless of any circumstance.
Ex: killing, suicide, adultery, rape, and the
likes.
Other Moral Principles Based on the Three Criteria
of Morality
A good act done for a bad end becomes bad.
Example: Politicians who gave relief goods to people
who were greatly affected by the mass flooding taking
advantage of the situation to campaign for the election.
A bad act done for a good end does not become
good
Example: When a father put the justice into his hands
and kills the murderer of his daughter to take revenge
for her death.
The end does not justify the means. (The end or
purpose does not justify the means or manner) This is
almost the same with letter b. No matter how good the
purpose is if the manner or way or act is bad then it is
not morally allowed.
Example: A student cheats during examination to pass
and obtain scholarship in a university. Recall also the
Robinhood story.
An indifferent act may become morally good or bad.
(depending on the purpose/intention)
Example: To study law is in itself an indifferent action. It
becomes good when inspired by the thought of
alleviating human sufferings or making a decent living.
It becomes bad if it is intended to perform illegal or
immoral actions.
An elder brother who puts hot sauce on a cake before
giving it to a begging younger brother, so that the
younger brother will not ask for more, and the elder can
have the cake all to himself.
Choose the lesser evil (if no other options or it is the
last resort)
This is only allowed if there are no other options and the
situation is a matter of life and death where you need to
decide at that very moment.
Why not give the same punishment for the same
crimes?
Aside from the purpose and circumstance which can
lessen or increase the culpability of a bad action, there
are also other factors which affect the manner or the
reason why a person committed such an act. Not all acts
are done perfectly by the doer/agent. There are the socalled kinds of human act or specifically called kinds of
voluntary act
Human Acts
 Willful
 Known
Kinds of Voluntary Act
1. Perfect Voluntary act – the is act done with full
knowledge and full consent.
2. Imperfect V.A. – the act is done with some defect
in the knowledge or consent.
3. Simple A. – the act is done by the agent because
he/she simply likes doing it.
4. Conditional A – the act is done with a condition.
“if”
5. Direct A – the act is intended by the agent.
6. Indirect A – the act is not intended by the agent
but an effect or result of the act which is directly
intended. Example: I intentionally threw a stone to
the window but it bounced back and hit my
playmates.
7. Actual A – the act is spontaneous; an act is a
result of an intention done here and now.
8. Virtual A – an act done is a result of a previous
intention (which may have been forgotten) – it is
like the act is planned.
9. Habitual A – the act done is a result of habit.
10. Interpretative A. – an act influenced by an
intention which is presumed (interpreted) to be
present in an agent who lacks the ability to
express his actual intention. Example: A
mute person is asking you something through sign
language, and you are the one who will interpret
what he/she is asking and you did or gave it. These
kinds of voluntary act are great factors which will
affect the judgement of a certain action.
Point for Reflection: Which of these kinds of
Voluntary Act is the most culpable if the act
committed is bad?
Ash Wednesday is the beginning of the Lenten
Season in the Catholic Liturgical Calendar (calendar
of worship celebrations). Lent is 40 days. As we
discussed in CFED 1013, 40 days in the Old
Testament symbolizes time for purification. It is time
for us to purify ourselves and undergo conversion
and return to the Lord if we have not been doing good
in our past days. It is time for repentance and
metanoia. Ash is a symbol of mortality, and people in
the Old Testament use it when they ask for
forgiveness from the Lord. Aside from using ash,
there are also two things that we (Catholics) do
during Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Fasting
and Abstinence. Fasting does not mean you will not
eat the whole day. It means take one full meal a day.
Out of your three meals, you should get full only once,
and take little food for the other two meals. Aside from
purification, fasting also means sacrifice, that we
share in the sacrifice of Christ who suffered for our
sins. Abstinence. This means do not eat meat. Point
to ponder: If you go to a so called “burol ng patay”
and they will offer you food with a meat as your
“ulam”. How do you feel? In line with this, we also
respect the body of Christ which suffered and died for
our sins. As Catholics, we are expected to practice
these two. Anyway, we are only required to do these
during Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. Two days
only, while other sects do not eat blood for the whole
of their lives. Fasting and abstinence also means
abstain from doing other pleasurable things or from
joyous moments during these days. “Nagfasting ka
nga ng food pero naglaro ka naman ng favorite mong
games the whole day, e nawala,na yung essence ng
pagfasting mo! These two days are the official days
for us to practice fasting and abstinence. Other
Fridays of the year is just recommended but not
obligatory. Why Friday? Because Jesus died on a
Friday. For your assignment, research on the
exemptions or who are exempted from doing fasting
and abstinence.
Invincible Ignorance – This refers to a total ignorance
of the person about the circumstance and other factors
surrounding the action that she/he committed. This total
ignorance is unintentional.
Impediments to Human Acts, Principle of
Double Effect, Stop Principle
Wrong action done under Crass Ignorance is
culpable but the culpability can be lessened. This is
so, since the person exerted little effort to dispel
his/her ignorance despite the opportunities to do
so.
Impediments to Human Acts
Human actions, though naturally a product of will and
reason, are sometimes influenced by many factors.
These factors can intervene and bar one’s actions from
being human or contribute to the reduction of the quality
of a certain action. Since they can bar one’s faculties
like the mind in performing a human act, these are
called impediments to human acts. These impediments
reduce the quality of human acts and so affects the
judgement or morality of human acts.
1. Ignorance – pertains to the lack of pertinent
information as to the nature, circumstances and
effect of a certain action. Either in commission
or omission, the willful lack of initiative to
properly understand the whole picture of the
circumstance affects the moral quality of an
action.
Ignorance takes place when an individual consciously
proceeds to act on a certain matter without due
consideration of the relevant o necessary information
related to it. Usually, this takes place when someone
unconsciously violates certain rules and regulations.
When asked to be made responsible for the action
committed, one asserts that he/she must not be held
accountable since he/she was unaware that such was a
violation. This example is a clear manifestation on how
ignorance directly alters the moral quality of an action.
Ignorance is classified into:
Vincible Ignorance – This is an ignorance that can be
dispelled/removed or learned through ordinary efforts,
conscientiousness and proper diligence. There are two
forms of vincible ignorance:
Crass Ignorance (lack of effort) – happens when
a person exerts little effort to dispel his ignorance.
Affected Ignorance – is a willful act of asserting
one’s ignorance in order to plead innocence to a
charge of guilt in doing or not doing an act. The
act is pretended. An example is a student who
pretends not to know the school’s policy on
proper haircut when confronted by the guards.
Morality of Actions done under Ignorance:
Wrong actions done under Invincible ignorance is
not culpable; because of one’s unintentional total
ignorance.
Example: A person who does not know how to read and
write caught for jaywalking. You cannot penalize
him/her since he/she is totally ignorant about the norm.
Bad action done under Affected Ignorance is totally
culpable. In fact, the culpability could increase
since the person just pretended his/her ignorance.
2. Concupiscence – Happens when inordinate
passion hinders one to exercise correct
reasoning.
Passions are the emotional elements such as pride,
anger, love, joy, and the likes. Concupiscence happens
when these passions push the person in doing a certain
act without the intervention of reasoning or mind.
Examples: Suddenly punching someone out of wrath,
destroying someone’s image out of envy, having preMarital sex with someone due to being in loved, etc.
Two kinds of Concupiscence:
(ante = before, consequent = after)
Antecedent Concupiscence – A spontaneous
inordinate passion influences an action before it is
controlled by the will. The act abruptly or suddenly
happens. This is called “gavva lang” in Ibanag
For example, Juan was allegedly running late for his
class. When he entered the school campus, the guard
confiscated his ID for no apparent reason. Out of anger,
he cursed the guard.
Consequent Concupiscence – happens when the
intellect is aware of the inordinate passion and the will
still choses to arouse the said passion and proceed with
the act. So, it is pre-meditated. Example: you got angry
with your classmates and after many hours or even a
day, you did not calm your anger and still wanted to
punch your classmates and you did it.
Morality of Actions done under Concupiscence:
Bad
actions
done
under
Antecedent
Concupiscence are still culpable but the culpability
can be lessened or can even be negated. This is so
since the action was abrupt and so not intentional.
Bad
actions
done
under
Concupiscence are totally culpable.
Consequent
3. Fear – Happens when the individual is
threatened by impending danger. The
existence of danger or threats can limit one’s
ability to use the will and reason and merely
acts base on the instinct to survive or overcome
the situation. There are two kinds of Fear:
Light Fear: The impending danger or threat is light or
somewhat like remote. Example is, your classmate tells
you that he will slap you if you will not give in to his
demand.
Grave Fear: The impending danger or threat is so
serious like a matter of life and death choices. Example
is when your classmate demands something from you
with his gun pointed at your head.
Morality of Actions done under Fear:
Bad action done with light or grave fear are both
culpable. This is because, despite the presence of
the threat, one can still choose to do what he/she
prefers to do, although the consequence can really
affect the decision.
4. Violence (physical attack) – Is the application
of physical force upon a resisting person to
compel him/her to do or not to do an act like
protecting oneself and others. There are two
persons involve here, the one who attacks and
the one who defends her/himself. What we
judge here is the reaction of the one being
attacked since the act of the one who attacks is
understood as bad.
Self-defense is a classic example for violence. With the
presence of fear, one has to protect himself/herself
against his/her perpetrator. Self-defense means, there
is no intention to kill one’s perpetrator but only to defend
oneself.
Morality of actions done under violence
If you are on the act of defending yourself against
your perpetrator like a rapist or killer or kidnapper
and unintentionally, you killed him/her, are you
culpable? Of course not, but if you intended to kill
your perpetrator while defending yourself, then you
are culpable although your culpability can be
lessened.
5. Habit – Firm and stable behavior pattern of
acting. An individual naturally and consciously,
although most often unconsciously performs an
action, as a result of its repetitive performance
through time. With the presence of habit, an
individual act based on his/her repeated
responses to situations.
Good habits are called virtues while bad habits are
vices. Obviously, we only moralize bad habits and not
the good ones. Examples of your habits is speaking bad
words as a reaction to situations, like “ko diablo” or
“diablo ka ko” or “pesti”, or always causing trouble in a
party when drunk, etc.
Morality of actions done under bad habit
Bad actions done because of habit are culpable. The
culpability is lessened only when the person exerts
utmost effort to free himself/herself from a vicious
habit.
The S-T-O-P Principle
There is one good practice which is very helpful in
dealing with passions and dilemmas or problems in life.
This is called the STOP principle.
S – Search for the fact/s. Study what is the issue behind
one’s problems or dilemmas and other related
situations.
T – Think for alternatives. This is necessary if your
proposed action is not clear or not sure.
O – Others are to be considered for advice. Ask others’
advice or suggestions if you are hard up.
P – Pray for guidance and wisdom. Pray to God for
enlightenment about the issue or problem.
*One should apply STOP if one is doubting, confused,
emotionally disturbed, things are unclear etc.
General Moral Principle:
One should not act nor decide if one is doubting,
confused, emotionally disturbed, problematic, things are
unclear and other same circumstances.
Double Effect – There are actions which have two
effects (good and bad)
Principles of Double Effect
One is allowed to do an act with two effects (good and
bad) under the following conditions.
1. The act must be good or at least morally indifferent.
2. The evil effect must not precede the good effect or
at least they should happen simultaneously.
So, the good effect must come first before the
bad one if ever.
3. There must be a sufficient reason to do the act.
Sufficient to do the act means like helping one
to escape death or escape danger and the likes.
4. The intention of the agent is honest.
There should be no other intention than to do
good like the ones mentioned as sufficient
reasons above.
An example of this is a physician/doctor operating a
pregnant woman with the expected effects if ever like
the mother might die in the process or the baby in her
womb might die or even the two might die.