Studia Theologica Varsaviensia, 1994, R. 32, nr 1

Stały URI dla kolekcjihttps://theo-logos.pl/handle/123456789/40958

Przeglądaj

Przeglądaj Studia Theologica Varsaviensia, 1994, R. 32, nr 1 wg Autor "Gubała, Wacław"

Wpisz kilka pierwszych liter i kliknij przycisk przeglądania
Teraz wyświetlane 1 - 1 z 1
  • Miniatura
    Pozycja
    Źródła moralności w świetle encykliki „Veritatis splendor”
    Gubała, Wacław (Akademia Teologii Katolickiej w Warszawie, 1994)
    Each act of moral doing descends originally from a human being, which is doing everything consciously, than, about each moral act determine consciousness and one's own free will, what we call the voluntary of an operating object. Each person who decides to make an act of doing anything, qualifies himself or herself as a human being, as a human person. And here, we must ask ourselves, what makes that an act is good and another is bad. The Encyclical „Veritatis Splendor” answers that „about the moral quality of an acting decides the relation, that is direct proportion, between the free consciousness of a person, and between right and real good”. (72). So an act is morally right and good when it is done consciously according to the real and truthfully good, in relation to the human being (71). Therefore, about the morality of a human acting decides an object of doing, which is willingly chosen by a human conscious will. This object is designate by the „set of goods which are having such properties that they are rightly serving to a designated person” The Encyclical „Veritatis Splendor” tells us about acts which are „bad from the internal side of the human mind or soul”, what means, that we are considering deeds, or doings, in which the object is radically contradicting against the rights of a human person. Considering this contradicting object, such deeds or acts are always bad, independently of no matter intention an acting person has or independently of whatever the circumstances. To those circumstances belong all acts and deeds which are against a human life, that is a man-slaughtering, an abortion, a euthanasia, and so on, what means, the all things which are spoiling the integrity of human being, and aim at human dignity, or are that dignity against. All such things and deeds are bad from their nature, independently of no good intention and no special or particular circumstances. From this delivers the principle that any good aim, no good purpose or destination, no good end can sanctify or justify the taking bad means, but good aim or good end can improve a morally good activity, or eventually any activity which is morally indifferent. Therefore the Pope John Paul II in his Encyclical is referring to those moral theories which are called „teleological”, and about which he points, that they aren’t to be reconciled with the tradition of the Saint Roman Church, because those theories, defined as consistentionals or proportionals, are putting primary the conformability human deeds or makings against the aims or the ends, to which is tending operating subject, and according to those values which the subject intends to achieve by his or hers doing. They are unacceptable, because they contradicts the Roman Church Learning, to which alone our Lord Christ gave the authority and rule, when he said to his apostles: „Peace be with you. As the Father sent me, so I send you” Then, he breathed on them and said: „Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive people sins, they are forgiven, but if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven”. And in another place Jesus Christ is saying: „I have been given all authority in heaven and on earth. Go then, to all peoples everywhere on earth. Go to all peoples everywhere and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son. and the Holy Spirit, and teach them to obey everything that I have commanded you, and I will be with you always to the end of the age” Match. 28, 19-20. Therefore as we sec, those theories cannot to be taken, because they are contradicting the Holy Roman Church in its tradition o f learning, to which alone is given the authority to justify conscious decisions, i. e.: decisions leading to deeds and actions, which arc contradicting against the law of God and nature.