By DONALD DeMARCO
In the interest of clarity, it is necessary to define what we mean by the words “Catholic” and “morality.”
“Catholic” is used in two different senses. The first is what we may call the “sociological” meaning that conceptualizes “Catholic” in terms of how Catholics behave. In this sense, Catholics who are living their faith and those who are not are mixed together. “Catholic” becomes an umbrella term that applies to any Catholic who calls himself a Catholic. Here, practice is separated from any unifying standard.
The second meaning, which is the proper one, views Catholics as those who are living their faith and abiding by the teachings the Church has honored throughout her history. A Catholic, then, is someone who believes and behaves according to Catholic standards.
In a similar way, we distinguish between two ways of understanding the term “morality.” In one sense, it characterizes the way people live in a very broad sense. Here, “morality” has a cultural implication and may differ from one culture to another. On the other hand, we can understand “morality” as a consistent set of rules based on the natural law and grasped through reason. This kind of morality is also based on the nature of the person and provides a way of life, though demanding and difficult, that is consistent with his nature and his final end.
“Catholic morality,” therefore, is a way of living that is consistent with the teachings of the Catholic Church and at the same time grounded in the existential reality of the human being as a person whose nature is discernible through reason and perfected through virtue. It is a formula for both freedom and personal fulfillment. Furthermore, it is philosophical and theological, rather than sociological and culturally determined.
As in sports, the game plan and its execution often differ widely. Aim and realization are not always on the same page. While reason is necessary to live a good life, it is not sufficient. We are weak creatures, subject to emotional swings, cultural pressures, and errors in judgment. The Seven Deadly Sins are never far from us, we can be deceived by pride, distracted by envy, devoured by anger, dissipated by lust, degraded by gluttony, dominated by avarice, and made indolent by sloth.
We need help that goes beyond reason, for it is eminently unreasonable to believe that reason alone can make us consistently behave reasonably.
The notion that we need something higher than reason was of paramount importance to St. Thomas Aquinas and for this reason, he dealt with it in the very first question he posed in his monumental Summa Theologiae. He argued that “the truth about God such as reason could discover, would only be known by a few, and that after a long time, and with the admixture of many errors.”
“Therefore,” he went on to state, “in order that the salvation of men might be brought about more fitly, and more surely, it was necessary that they should be taught divine truths by divine Revelation.” Aquinas’ advice is as practical as it is anthropologically sound.
As important as reason is, we cannot rely on it exclusively. Sooner or later, we make mistakes, see things in a confused way or do not see them at all, or are victimized by our pride. G.K. Chesterton accurately characterized pride as “the falsification of fact by the introduction of self.” In so stating, he brings out the foolishness of substituting self for fact. As he implies, we get in the way of truth and thereby distort it. Our ego is often in combat with truth and though it can never win, is reluctant to acknowledge that it ever loses.
The Danish poet, Piet Hein, who also made a name for himself as a mathematician, scientist, and inventor, called attention to this problem when he remarked as follows: “The noble art of losing face may one day save the human race and turn into eternal merit what weaker minds would call disgrace.”
The ego has trouble with truth. It is reluctant to acknowledge truths that are higher than itself and is loath to release from its grip the errors of its own way. The willingness to lose face, for Piet Hein, uncustomary as it may be, is the honest recognition that it is better to confess the truth than to cling to error. It should not be humiliating to admit to one’s mistakes. Rather, it should be a source of joy to trade them in for truths. Why would a person trade in a new Cadillac for a broken-down jalopy? Yet, how often the ego stands in the way of truth! For good reason, pride is the first of the Deadly Sins.
We wonder how often the eagerness to dissent from traditional Church teaching is simply an expression of pride. We should not want to exchange God’s truths for our own deceptions. Humility, therefore, becomes an indispensable virtue in living a life that accords with Catholic morality.
For, as St. Bernard of Clairvaux affirmed: “The three most important virtues are: humility, humility, and humility.” And, according to St. Augustine: “No one reaches the Kingdom of Heaven except by humility.”
Catholic morality, rightly understood, is profitable and practical, though unceasingly difficult. We are well advised to deal with the difficulties rather than to pare them down. We should prefer the path of most persistence to the one of least resistance.
Difficulties are manageable as long as they do not degenerate into doubts. Blessed John Henry Newman advised that “ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt.” Surely there will be difficulties of all kinds. But they should not be impediments to faith. It is better to say, “I believe, Lord; help my unbelief” (Mark 9:24).
(Dr. Donald DeMarco is professor emeritus, St. Jerome’s University. He is a regular columnist for St. Austin Review and an adjunct professor at Holy Apostles College. His latest book, Apostles of the Culture of Life, is posted on amazon.com.)
Powered by WPtouch Mobile Suite for WordPress