Is there anyone here who is a manualist? I have read Prummer, Slater, Jone, and Callan. Do you love manuals?
I wouldn’t call myself a “manualist”, but yes, I do love the traditional moral theology manuals.
There are a handful of scattered issues here and there with Jone, but I do not let that keep me from using his manual profitably.
His explanations of purely disciplinary matters, such as fast and abstinence, are based upon pre-Vatican II practice, and one needs to read Jone with that in mind. Again, those are purely disciplinary matters. True and false, right and wrong, good and bad, those things never change.
And as long as we’re discussing Jone, anyone who has spent some time on Catholic social media knows what the ONE BIG PROBLEM is with Jone, so let’s just get that out of the way right now, because I know it’s going to be raised as an objection sooner or later. I have to part company with Jone on this issue:
He didn’t need to go there.
I’m crying over it now? I don’t know if it is a sin to wonder why? Wait… wondering why is like wondering why my mom decided to cheat. This is so tragic
It’s nothing to cry over. Father Jone wrote the book, not you. His point of view on this repulsive issue is far outside the mainstream of Catholic moral teaching.
Jone’s text is well worth reading, but on this issue, his views are very strange. I really want to think that something got severely mistranslated from the German.
I only brought it up because anyone who wants to object to Jone can say, “yes, but did you read what he said about…”.
While educated laypersons can read moral theology manuals, they’re really intended more for seminarians and confessors.
I cry whether a nihil Obstat is still valid due to mistake. I need this theology book.
Jone’s defense of that vile act as, pardon me, a type of foreplay, is very tendentious, and it is covered amply in the old CAF (now CQ) thread I cited. Perhaps the bishop accepted this line of reasoning, and granted the nihil obstat and imprimatur on those grounds.
If I am ever again in a second valid marriage, that kind of thing wouldn’t be on my bucket list, let’s just put it that way. If nothing else, it would be extremely unhygienic, and again, pardon me, but to do that without completion on the part of the male, would be virtually impossible.
There are other problem areas with Jone, and it would take someone very well-skilled in Catholic moral theology to navigate them. And he also says “rape is not so common”. I wanted to cry out “like hell it’s not!”.
There are probably better moral theology books out there. That said, almost all of Jone is incredibly helpful — his analysis of acceptable versus non-acceptable medical and surgical procedures is excellent. He also devotes a massive section to business ethics and the binding moral force of legal contracts.
If a manual contain such an enormity, I will considered it not a something worth having or trusting.
I have spent an university year reading 19 century (and before) extracts of manuals, theologian dissertations, dialogue between bishop and the Sacred Penitenciary on that sensible topic for Catholics… How can we push the doctrine as far as possible… to allow spilling the seed for eg.
I made an indigestion. After I want something more simple, that does not try to find exceptions to the rule or change the rule. Oh, guess what, The Catholic Doctrine is not so complicated. Phew…!
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.