The Development of Moral Theology

Five Strands

Charles E. Curran

• Publisher: Georgetown University Press
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9781626160194
• eBook ISBN: 9781626160200
• Topic: Theologie & Religion
• Subtopic: Christliche Konfessionen

Charles Curran in his newest book The Development of Moral Theology: Five Strands, brings a unique historical and critical analysis to the five strands that differentiate Catholic moral theology from other approaches to Christian ethics—sin and the manuals of moral theology, the teaching of Thomas Aquinas and later Thomists, natural law, the role of authoritative church teaching in moral areas, and Vatican II. Significant changes have occurred over the course of these historical developments. In addition, pluralism and diversity exist even today, as illustrated, for example, in the theory of natural law proposed by Cardinal Ratzinger.

In light of these realities, Curran proposes his understanding of how the strands should influence moral theology today. A concluding chapter highlights the need for a truly theological approach and calls for a significant change in the way that the papal teaching office functions today and its understanding of natural law.

In a work useful to anyone who studies Catholic moral theology, The Development of Moral Theology underscores, in the light of the historical development of these strands, the importance of a truly theological and critical approach to moral theology that has significant ramifications for the life of the Catholic church.

CHAPTER 1
STRAND ONE

Sin, Reconciliation, and the Manuals of Moral Theology

SIN, CONVERSION, AND FORGIVENESS constitute significant aspects in the moral life of the Christian. Moral theology as a thematic, critical, and systematic reflection on the Christian moral life must pay serious attention to these realities. These realities have also exerted a significant influence on how moral theology has conceived its own purpose and function. This chapter discusses the historical development of these important realities and how they shaped the discipline of moral theology.

BIBLICAL UNDERSTANDING OF SIN AND CONVERSION

The nature of sin is central to understanding the message of Jesus and of the Church. Jesus came to redeem us through his gracious love from the power of sin. The paschal mystery involving the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus constitutes the victory of Jesus over sin and death. In a very true sense, sin brings about the death of Jesus, but through redeeming love Jesus triumphs over sin and death.

Perhaps the best theological understanding of sin is found in the book of Genesis. In the popular mind, Genesis tells us the story of Creation. Genesis, after all, is the first book of the Bible, and it begins with the Creation story or really two different versions of the Creation story. But I think that Genesis has a much different purpose. Genesis was never meant to be an eyewitness account of the beginning of life in this world through the creative activity of God. Genesis is a very mythical account written centuries into human history. The authors and redactors of Genesis were dealing with the problem that has always faced religious believers—how can you believe in a good and gracious God in the midst of all the evil, sorrow, and suffering that exists in our world? Genesis responds to this existential question by pointing out that God does not cause evil because God created all things good. Evil comes from the devil and human beings.

There are two different Creation narratives at the beginning of Genesis. Genesis 1–2:4a comes from the priestly source and follows the trajectory of the six days of Creation, ending with the creation of human beings with the frequent repetition that God saw that the work of Creation was good. Genesis 2:4b–3:24 comes from the Yawhist source. Here there is a different version of the Creation narrative. The creation of human beings does not come at the end of Creation, as in the first version. Adam is created and, after Adam, God creates the beasts of the field and birds of the air. But even with these, Adam was still lonely and had no one to share love and life with him. So God took a rib from Adam and made the woman. But then came the story of the “Fall.” Only good comes from God. Sin and evil come from the serpent and from the free will of human beings. The whole thrust of the story is to show that evil does not come from God.

In describing the Fall, there is an insightful description of sin. The popular understanding of the sin of Adam and Eve is that they disobeyed God’s command and ate of the fruit of the tree. Their sin was thus an act of disobedience against the command of God. But the understanding of sin portrayed here is much deeper. Sin affects our multiple relationships with God, neighbor, world, and self. Sin ruptures the relationship with God. Adam and Eve refused to accept their relationship of loving dependence on God; they wanted to be like God. In a very anthropomorphic way, the story narrates that God comes down in the cool of the evening to walk with them in the garden. What happened after their sin? They hid themselves because they had broken their relationship with God. At the end of the story of the Fall, God expels them from the garden. This expulsion is not an extrinsic penalty thought up by an angry God. Their expulsion from the garden constitutes the logical consequence of their own action. They had broken their relationship with God and could no longer live in the garden.

Sin also affects the relationship with the neighbor. This section of Genesis provides a lyrical account of the love union between Adam and Eve. Despite all of creation, Adam was lonely and yearned for a helpmate. So God made Eve. She was bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. Genesis describes their relationship as leaving all else and becoming two in one flesh. This relationship is greatly affected by their sin. When God confronts Adam about what he did, Adam points the accusing finger at Eve—she did it, not me. Instead of defending her and giving his life for her, he accused her. Genesis 4 tells the mythical story of the children of Adam and Eve—Cain and Abel. Cain became angry that God had no regard for his offering, but God did accept the offering of his brother Abel. Cain was jealous of Abel, and then killed him. The following chapters of Genesis show how sin spread throughout the world, so that by the time of Noah, there were very few just people.

According to Genesis, sin also affects human beings in their relationship to the world. Before the Fall, Adam had dominion over all the animals and plants that God had made. There was a perfect harmony with all other things serving the man and the woman. Recall that Adam had given a name to all the cattle, the beasts, and the wild birds. But sin brought discord into this harmonious world. In accord with the understanding of the time, the man’s life was primarily working to provide food and sustenance. But as a result of sin, the earth was now cursed, and the man suffered and sweat in his toil and efforts to till the soil. The earth was no longer like putty in his hand that he could easily work with; instead he knew sweat, toil, tears, and pain in his working. Also in accord with the prevailing understanding, the primary role of the woman was that of child bearer. As a result of sin, she now experienced the pains of childbirth and brought forth her children in pain and suffering. The muscles and tissues of her body would resist the process of birth. Childbearing should have been a joyful bringing of new life into the world, but now it was accompanied by pain and sorrow.

Sin also affects the relationship of human beings to themselves. Genesis 2:25 notes that the man and the woman were both naked but they felt no shame. After the Fall, their eyes were opened and they realized they were naked, so they made themselves loincloths. As created by God, the individual human person lived in perfect harmony with oneself. But after the Fall, they experienced the lack of harmony in their own selves. Genesis gives a most insightful understanding of the reality of sin in light of these fourfold relationships. Since the fundamental role of Jesus involves redeeming us from the power of sin and making us sharers in God’s love and life through the power of the Spirit, the new life must be seen in terms of the same four relationships.

In the Hebrew Bible, “covenant” is the primary way of understanding the relationship of God to God’s people. God’s loving-kindness moves God to choose a people as his own, and in return the people promise to be God’s people. God is faithful to the covenant promise, but the people often fall and do not live in accord with the covenant. The covenantal relationship thus describes the basic relationship of the individual with God. The initiative here is on God’s part—the free gift of grace. The people are called to respond to this gift. But the covenant does not just involve individuals. God made a covenant with a people. The individuals are called to be members of this community.¹

The New Testament retains the concept of covenant, but especially the Synoptic Gospels see the relationship to God in light of the twofold command of loving God and neighbor (Mt 22:34–40; Mk 12:28–34; Lk 10:25–28). Thus, God’s love for us also involves our relationship to other human beings. This raises the obvious question: who is my neighbor? The answer in Luke 10:25–37 is the person in need. Therefore, the new life in Christ Jesus also involves our relationship with neighbors far and near.

The twofold love command in the Synoptic Gospels also speaks about self-love.² We are to love our neighbor as ourselves. The Catholic tradition has always recognized the role for a proper love of self while also appreciating the danger of our inordinate self-love. The Christian scriptures heavily emphasize the kingdom or the reign of God. This is to be a reign of justice and peace, so the Christian must work for justice and peace in our world. Just as sin involves the fourfold relationships with God, neighbor, world, and self, so too the new life in Christ Jesus embraces the same relationships.

In light of such an understanding of sin and the new life we have in Christ Jesus through the power of the Spirit, we can understand better how Mark’s Gospel describes the preaching of Jesus. Jesus came into Galilee proclaiming the good news. The time has come; the reign of God is at hand; repent (change your heart) and believe in the good news (Mk 1:15). The Greek word “metanoia” means a change of heart and is perhaps best translated as a true conversion—moving from sin to grace, from enmity to friendship with God. Logically, such conversion must involve the same fourfold relationships.

In this general understanding, sin is not seen as a particular act but as the state or basic orientation of the person that has to be changed. Sin in this case is always in the singular. The Pauline writings emphasize this concept of sin. Sin refers to the ontological state of the person. Paul often refers to this state as slavery or estrangement from God. The person is either under sin or under grace. In Christ Jesus we are freed from sin and brought into the true freedom of the children of God—free to be at the service of God and others. According to the letter to the Romans, the Christian is freed from sin, death, and the law and now enjoys this true freedom of the children of God. Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:20 and 7:23 insists that the Christian is no longer a slave to sin because the Christian has been bought and paid for by Christ. Paul also describes sin as a state of enmity with God. We were enemies, but now we have been reconciled through the death of Jesus (Rom 5:10–11). For Paul there is this struggle between Christ and sin, so that redemption brings about reconciliation. Christians are no longer under sin and the law but now live under the power of the Spirit. The Christian is a new spiritual being who is dead to sin.³

The Johannine writings likewise stress the notion of sin in the singular, mentioning it thirteen times in the singular while the plural appears only three times. John’s notion of sin is that of separation from God and being in hatred of God and servitude to the devil.⁴

The New Testament also speaks of sin in the plural, which refers to sinful actions. The Greek word “hamartia,” which is often used in the New Testament, basically signifies missing the mark and thus refers primarily to acts. In Matthew’s Gospel, Mary’s son is to be called Jesus because he will save his people from their sins (Mt 1:21). The Synoptic Gospels frequently use the plural. The Lord’s Prayer has two different versions in the Synoptic Gospels. The Matthean version (6:9–13) prays for God to forgive our debts as we also have forgiven our debtors. The Lucan version (11:2–4) asks forgiveness for our sins as we ourselves forgive everyone who is in debt to us. Most English translations today speak of “our trespasses.”

The New Testament frequently contains catalogues of sins. In the Synoptic Gospels, for example, Matthew 15:19 and the parallel verse in Mark 7:21 mention fornication, theft, murder, adultery, avarice, malice, deceit, indecency, envy, slander, pride, and folly. The Pauline writings likewise contain such catalogues. As an illustration, Galatians 5:20 lists fornication, gross indecency and sexual irresponsibility, idolatry and sorcery, feuds and wrangling, jealousy, bad temper and quarrels, disagreements, factions, envy, drunkenness, avarice, and similar things. The pastoral epistles and the catholic epistles likewise contain such lists. For example, 2 Timothy 3:2–5 recognizes that some people are self-centered and grasping, boastful, arrogant and rude, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, irreligious, heartless, and implacable, slanderous, profligates, savages and enemies of everything that is good.

Sins in the plural are the concrete manifestation in the New Testament of sin in the singular, which I have understood in terms of affecting my relationships with God, neighbor, world, and self.

This role of the forgiveness of sin should have a significant place in the ongoing life of the community of the disciples of Jesus. The New Testament itself testifies to the role of the Church in the forgiveness of sin. Luke’s Gospel ends with the admonition that repentance and forgiveness of sins should be preached in Jesus’s name to all the nations beginning from Jerusalem. Matthew 18 speaks of forgiveness in terms of the sin of a brother against you. First you should go to the brother in private. If that does not work, bring in two or three witnesses; if that does not work, go to the Church. If the sinner refuses to listen to the Church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. Matthew then has Jesus telling the disciples that whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.

Karl Rahner and others maintain that binding and loosing are two distinct and successive acts in the total reaction of the Church to sin. To bind means to put under the ban in the sense that the sinner by her actions separates herself from the love that joins together the members of the Church into one community, so that the Church must react in a visible way to the sin of the member. Loosing, then, is the reconciliation of the penitent sinner with the Church community. Such an understanding fits with the context of Matthew 18 and with some older Israelitic traditions. This process of excluding and then reconciling the sinner with the community is not the same as the contemporary canonical practice of excommunication, which comes from a different source. Such an approach was more visible in the practice of canonical penance in the early church but is still present in a recognition that the person in mortal sin cannot fully participate in Eucharistic communion. Reconciliation with the Church constitutes the sign of the reality of reconciliation with God.⁵

This inter...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• 1 Strand One: Sin, Reconciliation, and the Manuals of Moral Theology
• 2 Strand Two: Thomas Aquinas and the Thomistic Tradition
• 3 Strand Three: Natural Law
• 4 Strand Four: Papal Teaching Office
• 5 Strand Five: Second Vatican Council
• Conclusion: Where Do We Stand Today?
• Index