LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

… for good. Catholics of the future must live predominantly out of love rather than out of fear.

      Believing in a primitive and angry god is unhealthy, and unhealthy actions such as sexual abuse can grow out of this unhealthy culture.

      _________________

      ³ Ex. 21:25, Deut. 19:21.

      ⁴ Ex. 20:1–17; Deut. 5:6–21.

      ⁵ Lev. 19:18.

      ⁶ Matt. 7:12.

      ⁷ John 13:34.

      ⁸ Matt. 5:43.

      ⁹ Luke 14:8–10.

      ¹⁰ Mic. 6:8.

      ¹¹ 2 Sam. 24:15.

       CHAPTER TWO

MORAL IMMATURITY

      According to Webster’s dictionary, morality is ‘the quality of an action as conforming to or deviating from the principles of right conduct.’ This is the most common meaning of the word ‘morality’ in the world today. In this understanding, morality is about performing right actions and avoiding wrong ones. This approach to morality has two serious drawbacks.

      The first is that it lacks a context, for it does not address the purpose we hope to achieve by doing right actions, that is: why we should want to do good or be good.

      The second difficulty is a corollary of the first, for the definition does not face the question of whether performing right actions, in and of itself alone, is an adequate means to achieve any purpose we might have, that is: whether doing right things, of itself alone, will make us good.

      In its simplest terms, in any human enterprise, we first ask two questions: what goal do we wish to achieve and how shall we achieve that goal? The enterprise of living a moral life must address the same two questions.

       THE PURPOSE OF MORALITY

      In his novel, A Burnt-Out Case, Graham Greene depicts an unlovable character named Rycker.¹² Rycker had spent a number of years in the seminary studying to be a priest, but left before ordination and eventually drifted to live in a small village in the heart of Africa. In his own words: ‘At the seminary I always came out well in moral theology.’¹³ In the book he constantly annoys the priests at the nearby leper colony with the artificial moral dilemmas he invents and loves to discuss for hours. Despite this, he is not a particularly moral person.

      Among the mistakes he makes are:

      • his attitude is negative, so he concentrates on not doing wrong things rather than actually doing something that might help someone

      • he concentrates on the details of his life, i.e. specific actions, but ignores the plot, i.e. the whole direction his life is taking

      • his model of morality is basically legal, i.e. obeying moral laws rather than truly imitating Jesus Christ

      • he is motivated by fear more than love

      • because of the kind of morality he practises, a debilitating guilt is never far from him

      • while avoiding specific actions that are clearly forbidden, he is unloving towards his wife and the African people who work for him

      • if asked about goals and means, his honest reply would have to be: ‘The goal is that of getting into heaven; the means is that of not doing wrong things.’

      The meaning given by Webster’s dictionary to the word ‘morality’ is a restrictive one. It is part of the reason why being called a ‘moral person’ can have overtones of being judgemental, unloving and holier-than-thou.

      The meaning of the word ‘morality’ should go far beyond not doing wrong things, for it must essentially include the purpose of:

      • seeking to rise above ourselves and our own self-interest and to act on behalf of others

      • seeking to act in accordance with what is deepest within ourselves

      • seeking to open ourselves to truth, reality and life

      • seeking to become more authentically ourselves

      • seeking to grow to become all we are capable of being

      • seeking to base our lives on justice and love.

      In this life we are called to become all we are capable of being, all God invites us to be. If we wish to do this, we must try to live at the higher end of the six levels of morality I spoke of in the last chapter: on the bases of respect and love.

       THE RESPONSE OF LOVE

      The story of Jesus tells us that God is constantly saying to each one of us, ‘I love you’, and the only adequate response on our part is, ‘I love you too’. From this response will flow many truths, many principles of right conduct and a genuine worship of God, but the response of love to the person comes first. Without the response of love to the person, the truths will become lifeless, the principles of right conduct will be burdensome tasks and the worship will be empty. With the response of love, the truths will come alive, the principles of right conduct will be the most natural things in the world and the worship will be life-giving. Right conduct divorced from the response of love will always be inadequate.

      It follows from this that morality is essentially relational, for it is essentially about the kind of relationship we wish to have with God and, therefore, with other people. It is about the kind of god we worship: an angry god, a just god or a loving god. Despite all his studies, Rycker had failed to learn this simple truth and was caught in the worship of an angry god or—at best—a just god, but certainly not a loving god. He failed to see the fundamental truth that morality is about relationships more than individual actions. Christian morality cannot be simply about ‘not doing wrong things’. It must be about building our relationship with God.

      It follows that it is vitally important that morality and spirituality not be separated, so the saint is the truly moral person and the truly moral person will be a saint. The natural sense we all have within us that we should live morally must be seen as an invitation to holiness. If morality and spirituality are separated, morality will inevitably wither and die.

       COMMANDMENTS AND BEATITUDES

      If a family comes to live next door to me and I do no harm to them, I can hope that they will not become my enemies. But if I want them to be much more than ‘not enemies’, if I want a relationship of love and friendship, I must go well beyond ‘doing no harm’. Our first moral duty is not to harm others and our second is to do what we can to help them. The first duty comes first, for it is foolishness to speak of helping people while we are actually harming them. The concern of the commandments is with this first duty and, because it comes first, we can never do away with it. Jesus never rejected the Ten Commandments: it is wrong to kill, harm life-giving relationships, steal legitimate possessions and damage a person’s good name, and he proclaimed these truths constantly.

      The Commandments, however, largely express negative requirements for growth (‘You shall not…’). Even if we observe every negative commandment perfectly, this does not yet say very much about our spiritual state. It says what we have not done, but does not say that we have actually done anything positive to assist others. The negative commandments are a necessary foundation, for they ensure that we do not do positive harm to others, but they cannot in themselves build true moral and spiritual growth.

      It was for this reason that Jesus, without doing away with the Ten Commandments, added to them the beatitudes.¹⁴ To ‘You shall not kill’ Jesus added, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers’. Not to kill or harm is the essential foundation, but true spiritual growth is to be found in doing all we can to create peace. To ‘You shall not steal’ Jesus added, ‘Blessed are the poor in spirit’. Not stealing is the foundation, but true growth is to be found in the active seeking of spiritual

Скачать книгу