Moral Theology Handbook

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rau
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Rau

Guest
I am not aware of many on-line reference sources on (Catholic) Moral Theology. But I came across this one recently care of another CAF poster:
Handbook of Moral Theology

@Ender and @o_mlly : You may be interested in the definition of moral object found inside, noting our debate on that point on a recent thread. The definition there reads very much along the lines of the one I used in the debate, which is also the consistent with the one Ron Conte uses. [I mention RC because his website is so readily encountered when one googles terms such as moral object or the three fonts of morality etc.].

“The end of an action (the intrinsic and objective end) is that to which the action tends of its very nature directly and immediately: for example, the natural end of an act of almsgiving is the relief of the neighbour’s need…The end of the action is known also as the moral object of the action…”
 
Thank you for posting this. I shall bookmark this so I can refer to it. I’ll look through it before I comment again about the distinction between the end of the object and the end of the act.
 
Prummer is the classic “Manualist” approach to teaching moral theology.

Keep in mind that:
(a) There was a reason why this approach to teaching theology in seminaries of old was abandoned.
(b) Many Thomistic Professors believe the manualistic approach to Aquinas is a degeneration and over simplification of his theological system and his approach to studying theology.
(c) Different Thomistic traditions still fight over what Aquinas really meant by “moral object”. It is one of the most complex and difficult subjects in moral theology.
(d) Do take Ron Conte’s understanding of the three fonts with a very large pinch of salt. It leacs him to some disturbing moral positions.
 
BlackFriar said:
Do take Ron Conte’s understanding of the three fonts with a very large pinch of salt. It leacs him to some disturbing moral positions.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure it’s his position on the 3 fonts that causes him to come up with various moral conclusions that cause consternation. I have crossed “Swords” with him too and the issue seemed to be different.
 
Rau said:
Do you mean if one can write a manual on the topic, then one takes a manualist approach?
Click to expand...
When the manual is as thick, in depth, “definitive” and comprehensive as Prummer’s attempts to be then I would say yes. Its probably a flawed approach to anything when taken this far.

But I like manuals as a starting point and would love to have an English copy but to date have only found an online version. The uncritical translation into English would be another point of difficulty as you say.
 
I find that reading Fr. Prummer’s Handbook dispels some of the myths surrounding the much maligned manualist tradition. It’s organized around the virtues, and could only be considered “legalist” by someone who thought that any system of rules was “legalist”. It’s unfortunate that the full Manual hasn’t been translated into English.

I don’t see any good reason for the abandonment of the manualist tradition, and the arguments against it (even those made by solid Thomists) tend to be based on a caricature. Keep in mind that the Church never said “stop using the manuals”, it’s just one of the things that people did in the name of VII but without any actual mandate.
 
What sources did you read that charge the manualists with legalism?
 
It’s a rather common criticism of them, in my experience. In any case, my point was that it’s a bad criticism.
 
Thank you for the link. Implicit in almsgiving, a special category of giving, is beneficence making the act uniquely human and in accord with eternal law.

The physical act “throw the switch” lacks this implicit indication to what apparent good the will is necessarily directed. One must add the foreseeable ends known to all possible actors in order to determine the act’s object. Only then can one make a determination of the object and its accord with God’s will. Fr. Prummer explains it well.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top