Return to Main Contents
| Rules Of Conscience | |
Section Two Rules To Be Followed When We Have Still Not Formed Our Conscience |
| The Problem |
||||
|
|
Do doubtful consciences and probable consciences exist? |
|||
|
|
The possibility of practically and speculatively doubtful consciences |
|||
|
|
The question concerns the state of our spirit after, not before, reflection upon the morality of an action |
|||
|
|
The doubt under discussion is about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of an action, not about its advisability |
|||
| The Solution To The First Question: 'What Must I Do When I Am Uncertain Of The Lawfulness Of My Action?' |
||||
|
|
We cannot carry out an action as long as we are unsure whether it is free from sin |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Certainty, and how it differs from probability |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
If we act when in doubt about the lawfulness of our action, the gravity of our sin is in proportion to the degree of probability to which we give assent in the doubtfully lawful action |
|||
| The Second Question: 'How Can I Eliminate Uncertainty About The Lawfulness Of An Action, And Form A Conscience If My Doubt Concerns The Intrinsic Unlawfulness Of The Action?' |
||||
|
|
New proofs of what was affirmed in the preceding chapter |
|||
|
|
A clearer exposition of the second question |
|||
|
|
The first step towards answering the second question: we prove that any doubt about the lawfulness of an action arising from the intrinsic nature of the action itself can be eliminated only through persuasion of the action's intrinsic morality |
|||
|
|
An answer to an objection dependent upon the obscurity of the natural law |
|||
| Schema | Schema of Certainty - (Image) | |||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Contradiction in the opposing teaching |
|||
|
|
The continuation of our proof that doubt about the intrinsic unlawfulness of an action cannot be resolved by any reflective principle, but only by showing that the action is not intrinsically unlawful although falsely supposed to be so |
|||
|
|
The intrinsic guilt of actions |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation |
|||
|
|
Continuation: on chastity |
|||
|
|
Continuation: cases in which some compromise must be reached because the mutual rights of the parties are doubtful |
|||
| Solving A Doubt About The Extrinsic Unlawfulness Of An Action |
||||
|
|
Connection with the preceding chapter |
|||
|
|
Two extrinsic causes that make an action unlawful |
|||
|
|
The formation of conscience when doubt about the unlawfulness of an action arises from doubt about the correspondence between the action and the required PRACTICAL ESTEEM |
|||
|
|
The formation of conscience when doubt about the unlawfulness of an action is CAUSED by doubt about the positive law |
|||
|
|
Continuation: doubt arising from the law |
|||
|
|
|
Doubt about the existence of a law arising from doubt about how it was instituted |
||
|
|
|
The doubtful existence of a law arising from doubt about an intrinsic defect in the matter of the law |
||
|
|
|
Doubt about the cases included in a defectively stated law |
||
|
|
|
Doubt whether a law has been abrogated or has ceased, for any reason |
||
|
|
|
General solution of the problem |
||
|
|
|
Limits to the solution |
||
|
|
|
Explanation of some well-known rules on conscience |
||
|
|
|
Injustice towards probabilism |
||
|
|
The formation of conscience when doubt about the unlawfulness of an action is caused by doubt about the positive law arising not from the law but from our ignorance |
|||
|
|
|
Legal and moral effects of positive law |
||
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
Culpable and inculpable ignorance: solving a doubt caused by culpable ignorance of the positive law |
||
|
|
|
Solving a doubt arising from inculpable ignorance about a positive law |
||
|
|
|
Doubt about a fact which is a condition of a positive law |
||
| Removing Doubt About The Unlawfulness Of An Action When We Have Only Fallible Authority To Guide Us |
||||
|
|
The question at issue |
|||
|
|
|
Summary |
||
|
|
|
A new question |
||
|
|
|
Continuation: the limits of the question |
||
|
|
|
Continuation |
||
|
|
|
Objections by those who wish to decide all moral cases on the sole authority of modern moralists |
||
|
|
The question answered |
|||
|
|
|
The order to be followed in the use of sources employed for deciding moral cases and forming one's conscience |
||
|
|
|
Continuation: the fallible authority of experts must not render doubtful any sure decision dependent upon the first three sources |
||
|
|
|
Continuation |
||
|
|
|
Is there a safe way provided by authority, and what is it, for a person who lacks knowledge, or cannot eliminate doubt for himself? |
||
|
|
|
An objection resolved |
||
|
|
|
Is the authority of a single moralist sufficient as a rule of life? |
||
|
|
The knowledge appropriate to a confessor |
|||
|
|
|
Knowledge of probable opinions is not sufficient for a confessor |
||
|
|
|
Confessors have to form firm, certain persuasions for themselves; how they can do this |
||
|
|
The difference to be observed in applying to oneself and others the rules we have set out |
|||
| How Doubts Are To Be Solved By Those Unable To Use The Preceding Rules |
||||
| A Comparison Between Our System And Better Known Systems |
||||
|
|
Systems rejecting all reflective principles |
|||
|
|
All reflective principles enunciated up to now are right and true, but insufficient to solve moral cases |
|||
|
|
Reflective principles must be certain; probable or more probable reflective principles are not sufficient |
|||
| A Comment On The Probabilists' Boast That Their System Has Removed Sin Where Sin Once Existed |
||||
| Main Contents | Home |