How Can we learn

what

has to teach?
Alasdair MacIntyre
Alasdair
MacIntyre
Veritatis Splendor
• In August 1987, on the occasion of
the second centenary of the death
of St. Alphonsus de Ligouri, Pope
John Paul II sent a letter to the
moderator of the Redemptorist
Order in which he made known his
intention to publish an encyclical
on the fundamentals of moral
theology. Six years later he
promulgated Veritatis
Splendor (Vis, 'The Splendor of
Truth').
 VERITATIS SPLENDOR
• is written to address a specific problem;
• the lack of harmony between the
magisterium’s teaching and “certain
theological positions, encountered in
seminaries and faculties of theology.”
 Introduction
• We live in a time of great moral confusion.
False moral systems are being promoted in
every imaginable way.
• This confusion has allowed evils like
contraception, abortion, euthanasia, test-tube
babies, surrogate motherhood, and embryonic
research to become increasingly acceptable.
 Preamble of VS
• The Splendor of truth shines forth in all the
works of the Creator and, in a special way, in
man, created in the image and likeness of God
(cf. Gen 1:26).
• Truth enlightens man's intelligence and shapes
his freedom, leading him to know and love the
Lord. Hence the Psalmist prays: "Let the light
of your face shine on us, O Lord" (Ps 4:6).
 Matthew 19:22 - What must I do?
• Dialogue between Jesus and the rich young
man
• Meaning of life
• Moral goodness and eternal life
• God is the fullness of Goodness
• Religious foundation of the moral question
• The pope perceives a trend within the Roman
Catholic Church —
– “the spread of numerous doubts and objections of
a human and psychological, social and cultural,
religious and even properly theological nature,
with regard to the Church’s moral teachings” (VS
#4-5).
• He hopes to correct this trend by reinforcing,
among other things,
– the universality and permanent validity of natural
law,
– the link between faith and morality, and the
magisterium’s authority beyond intervening “only
to ‘exhort consciences’ and ‘propose values’ ” in
light of which individuals make their decisions and
life choices independently (VS #4-5).
• But his concern with ecclesial authority is
rooted in a deeper concern over the rising
individualism in contemporary society.
• He questions whether the individual’s
conscience — and its criteria of “sincerity,
authenticity, and ‘being at peace with
oneself’” — should be the supreme tribunal of
moral judgment (VS #32).
• He questions the loss of an idea of universal and
absolute truth, wondering whether a relativistic
conception of morality can provide the very
warrants needed to speak out against the
violation of human rights and serious forms of
social and economic justice.
• Can relativism ensure the values of “justice,
solidarity, honesty, and openness” that are often
identified with individual freedom (VS #98)?
On the Author : Alasdair MacIntyre
• is a Scottish-American
philosopher who has contributed
to moral and political philosophy
as well as history of philosophy
and theology.

• MacIntyre's After Virtue (1981) is
one of the most important works
of Anglophone moral and political
philosophy in the 20th century.
• He is Thomistic,
Aristotelian,
• as well as a North
American immigrant
• and also a Catholic
Veritatis splendor can be read in
2 different ways
• How to Read this
Document
• It can be read, and of
course it should be
read, as :
• 1. a papal encyclical, a
piece of authoritative
Christian teaching &
Moral Theology
• 2. As a Philosophical Work
– Advanced of the relationship between biblical &
other Christian teaching
– Various moralities of the various cultures
– Argumentative conclusion of Moral Philosophers
• As it is addressed to the Catholic bishops and its
subject matter is not only Christian moral
teaching in general,
• but more particularly the present condition of
the academic discipline of moral theology.
 The Author’s Opinion
• For Veritatis splendor is not only a work of authoritative
Christian teaching about moral judgment and the moral
life,
• it is also a striking contribution by the Polish
phenomenological and Thomistic philosopher Karol
Wojtyla to ongoing philosophical enquiry,
• one in which an incisive account is advanced of the
relationship between biblical and other Christian teaching,
• the various moralities of the various cultures of
humankind,
• and the argumentative conclusions of moral philosophers.
The Significance
• The central theses of this
encyclical thereby challenge
a range of rival philosophical
accounts of that relationship:
Kantian, utilitarian, and
Kiekegaardian, to name only
the most important.
 Argumentative
Moral Philosophy

• Central Thesis : relationship btw

Kantian, Utilitarian &
Kiekegaardian ethics
• Not to just stand by today’s
Philosophy itself, what it is and
what it can legitimately hope to
achieve
• Understood in the light of the
Christian Gospel
• To something beyond Philosophy
• Has an argumentative structure
• Or tries to give some definitive answers
• About the relation b/w
• Thomistic Aristotelian – Its (Christian
Philosophers) moral judgment of life
• N. American immigrant – dominant moral
theories & practices & (culture)
• Catholic – Biblical Christian teaching
Which all arguments are discussed here
• Thomistic – 1st set – practical reason to
apprehend our precepts of the natural law.
(our nature)
• Aristotle, Aquinas & others – 2nd set – anti-
Thomistic critic’s practices to understand 2nd
set.
• Anti-Thomistics includes : (David Hume)
Humeans, Kantians, Utilitarians, Existentialists,
Relativists)
There are conflicts between these Ethics…

• Anti - Thomist - Dominant – recent moral theories

• Debate themselves – Kantians X Utilitarian
X X
Humeans Nietzcheans

• Catholics – in conversations with these differences

• Encyclical teaches us – what we encounter in the
Moral requirements imposed by our own human
practical understanding of reasoning
When they are in good order
• There are conflicts between these Ethics…
• We need answers final unconditional answers
• An reach ultimate truth
• Grace : corrects us and completes it
• Biblical teaching : not an act of coercive
impositions by an external authority.
• Veritatis But an invitation to become more
Splendor thoughtful & more perceptive

• A reassertion of central truths

• A characterization of a number of types of
contemporary errors
Philosophical, Theological &
Moral
• Truths which we shall sufficiently understand only by
considering some mistakes about them
• (4 errors)
• Starts with the encyclical’s creative & constructive
statement of Thomistic account of natural law.
• As the Encyclical stresses, the Church has included “in
her own teaching on morality.”(n.44., p.59)
• May be tempted into teaching us as a restatement of
what was already.
• Our morality begins from Thomism
 Thomism in Encyclical
• John Paul made ample use of the existential realism of
St. Thomas in his philosophical work prior to his election
• We also for Thomistic natural law theory and moral
philosophy in Veritatis Splendor
• An analysis of the epistemological and metaphysical
principles advocated by Thomas is also found here.
• St. Thomas explains that human reason and
supernatural faith help us formulate the right rule of
human conduct by coordinating human acts with the
eternal law of God.
• Thomas’ teaching on the interiority of natural
law as found in his Summa Theologiae I-II, q.
91, a. 2:
• Is there a natural law within us?
– In answering this question we see Thomas explain
that human freedom is a God-given power
enabling man to know moral truth as
– « contained in the law » (VS # 52.1)
• “The Negative precepts of the natural law are
universally valid….”
• E.g., Jesus’ affirmation of Decalogue. (Mt 19:17-18)
• He is completing every truths.
• “Valid for all people of the present; as was of the Past”
• “permanent structural elements of human beings.
• Already knew or could have known for ourselves as
required for our good.
• Hence obedience to God is not, or some would believe,
a heteronomy…”
 Immanuel Kant
• Agreement : in understanding the – ve precepts of
the moral law as exceptionless prohibitions.
– Don’t kill … this law cant be changed
• Disagreement: in its assertion that human reason
needs to be instructed by this revelation of God’s law.
– Here what Kant says is => we are to do our duty by
obeying the moral law for it’s own sake.
– Catholic Gospel position : even hatred is beginning of
killing
– The Encyclical says is => we are also to obey that law for
the sake of the further good of ourselves and of others.
• The encyclical in a way qualifies the Kantian
idea or goes beyond in speaking of the
bonum/good.
• Lose
God
himself
 How to weigh the acts
• Killing an aggressor => Utilitarian =>Ok
• Thomist => intend – death of the aggressor? No
• Error: in view of what some of the –ve precepts of the
natural law require and consequent misunderstanding
of how certain practical conclusions follow them.
• E.g. theft. Acc. Thomas Aquinas > need to know the
concept of property of ownership
• A north American perspective it was ok to kill
• Utilitarian: upholding of property right > needy
person should be allowed to starved to death.
 Consequentialists
• Consequentialists : weighing of balancing
consequences.
• The good at stake in all situation in which
obedience to the natural law is in question is such
that no other can be weighed against it.
• Error : concerning the intentions of agents :
intentions or purposes can make the acts that flow
from it good.
• To will badly, as to act badly, is to fail in the
achievement of human freedom.
 Choices
• It is on the basis of individual preferences and
choices that values and norms including those
of morality, come into being & from
preferences and choices that derive their
authority.
 Choices Preferences Principles

↓ Philosophical
Commitments
↓ Human – ability to
create moral values

• All individuals are going through this

Philosphical process even unknowingly
• Error : Conception of moral freedom or a power
in each of us to make our own fundamental
premoral choice of moral norms and values
– E.g. Senete Joseph Biden (1991 hearing) p.183
 Freedom :
• Freedom : depends upon what their capacities are; actualizing,
success in doing.
• Phronesis (Prudentia)=> capacity to choose
– Development & Exercise of our capacities
– Choices => to do good engaging with each other.
– ‘good’ vary according to culture to culture.
– What will not vary is twofold
• What will not vary is twofold
– 1. the need for a presupposed understanding that such goods will
contribute to the achievement of the human good and
– 2. the need for recognition of a set of requirements which enable
human beings from the disciplines of learning. (which enables other
questionings also)
• Relationship with others => rational conversations
• Relationship with ourselves => ability to learn from our own
experiances
• Confirmity to the precepts of the natural Law is a precondition of
the kind of learning => for oneself is in relation with others.
• Error: attempts to hate human freedom in a freedom to make
choices which are prior to and independent of precepts of natuarl
law.
• They suppose that acknowledgement of the natural law is
incompatible with freedom
– #35. “an alleged conflict between freedom and law”
– “Right to determine what is good or evil”
– E.g. Never kill a person, except when….”
• #100 & @101 => Social and political
consequences of these exceptions
– Reduces person “ to use-value or serve of profit”
– An alliance between democracy & ethical
relativism
• Each individual as free to decide upon his/her own
moral rules.
 On Circumstance
• Intrinsically Evil Acts
• These are acts like rape, murder, and adultery that are
always evil, no matter what the circumstances or intentions.
• Error: These acts remain evil, with no exceptions. They can
never become good acts. A person can commit an
intrinsically evil act and not be personally guilty but this
does not alter the evil of the act. Objective Morality
Examines the rightness and wrongness of humans acts as
they are in themselves Subjective Morality Examines the
personal guilt or merit an individual has for their moral acts.
 Conclusions
• This encyclical calls for a calm and profound reflection
on the entirety of the Church’s moral doctrine,
especially certain fundamental truths that
– « in the present circumstances, risk being distorted or
denied ».
• Pope John Paul II affirms that the reigning climate of
moral relativism and subjectivism is due to
anthropological and ethical presuppositions espousing
absolute human freedom detached
– « from its essential and constitutive relationship to truth ».
 Conclusions
• 99. Only God, the Supreme Good, constitutes the unshakable
foundation and essential condition of morality, and thus of
the commandments, particularly those negative
commandments which always and in every case prohibit
behaviour and actions incompatible with the personal dignity
of every man.
• The Supreme Good and the moral good meet in truth: the
truth of God, the Creator and Redeemer, and the truth of
man, created and redeemed by him.
• Only upon this truth is it possible to construct a renewed
society and to solve the complex and weighty problems
affecting it.
• The truth referred to here is not an abstract
reality but
– « the truth of God, the Creator and Redeemer, and
the truth of man, created and redeemed ». (VS,
99.1).
• Separation of human freedom from this truth
denies man’s condition as a creature of God,
– « as the visible image of the invisible God, [and]...
the subject of rights which no one can violate »
• The basic guiding principles of Christian
morals express human freedom in terms of
intelligibility, the knowledge of the revealed
truth of man as a creature of God.