8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

1/7

reedom and

T-/n the l"st.hapter we looked at some of the maior conditions foru* " ni-* p.*on made in the imagc of God ln this chapter' we will;#?."il;; iJlp"nt,urt conditions-of being a moral subiect' frecdonr;"ffi;;iJ;, ;pJiaily tbe kin

8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

2/7

Rcaw Infomcd By Feitbpotential. But hetedity does not predetermine specifcelly what we will do orwho we will become. Our fieedom can be exercised across a brocd spectruoof genetic possibilities end is subiect to ovironmental influences. We mustfind our way within thc limits of thcse potentids and the forces of the social-cultural conditions which slrape our worldvicw and influence not only theway ve intrpret expetiend but even tITe kirds ofexperiene we have. Thefiqueotly gven advice "Be yourself" is not simply ptmission to turn in ononeself; it is, instead, an cncouragement to express oneself within one's ownlimits rnd according to one's own predispositions. Freedom necessarily actswithin the given conditions of heredity and envirorunent.One of the dangers in facing these limitrtions is that we can sell out todeterminism. Selling out is en attempt to escape from freedom by claimingthrr we are forced to be who we are and to do what we do by herediry orenvironment- If we sell out, then we claim that we are not responsible foranything .v6 de. In fact, by refusing to acccprt the freedom which is ours, weshor' that rve are afraid to accept responsibility. One of the tasks of humanlife is to achieve freedom in those areas where we are not yet free. Therefore,a primary goal of monl education is to free people from becorning directed bythe unalterable givgns of heredity or by the chengeatrle limits of some exter-nal authority. It is to free them to live well within limits.Of course. the behavioral sciences have clearly shown that our freedornis limited. Our actions fall somewhere on the continuum betwen absolutefreedom and absolute determiaism. If this were not so, I suspect we wouldnot hrve tie experience of feeling unsetded or indecisive about our choices.Moreover, we would not have to deliberate about anything if we were com-pletely free or completely determined.Assuming, then, some freedom of selfdetermination in the moral life,we rccogaize thut one purpose of this freedom is to appropriate actively whathappens to us into the persons we are and can yct beomc. We do not look onhum4n existence as though we should all be deelt a winning hand. Rather, wesee life as a matrcr of playing well the hand we have been handed. Freedomeoables us to integrate the "slings and arrows ofqrtrageous fornrne" into ourlives so that we might grow tcward wholencss and live with peace. Thisinvolves making what happens to us part of who we are. Turning necessityinto a virnre is one of the signs of a sbong moral chrracter, and it is anexpression ofour capecity for selfdeterminatiom. .. But what does this kind of frecdom look like? Stanley Hauerw.as tells astory that shows how much the capaciry for this frcedom is associated prlmar-ily with character and not with choices or actions.

I have r friend who, after failing to get tenure at a university as aphilosopher, decided to go to law school. He is now an extfrordi-

narily able lawyer end is quite hrppy he ..decided. to go to lawschool; but in another sense he hardly decided rt all^ He was forcedto go to INw school because his teaching career wrs blocked. Thefact that he is now happy as a lawyer means that he has leerned tomake a vinue out of neessity.rAs the old ioke would have it, if someone dumpa a load of lemons on yourpnrch, don't complain. Make.lemonade!Wc cennot be held morally accounable for the determining givens of ourlives, but since thy constirute something of wbo we are, they need to beappropriated into ourclves. The more we are able to become aware of our-

. selves and possess ourselves, including all the determining influences, themore we will experience ourselves as responsible for what we do and who wcbecome.The freedom to decide about oneself and to make someone of oneselfbrings us squarely in touch with what theologians call iavc or core freedom.Basic freedom is directed roward a loving relationship with God, the ultimateend of our lives. But since we experience God in mediated ways, we ulti-mately establish our relationship with God in and through the ways we rclateto all things. For this reason, basic freedom ofself-determination before Godis always incrmated in the panicular choices we make thmugh life-But not every choice we make involves us at the deepest levels of ourbeing. For example, consider thes two expressions of freedom of choice. Atour seminery we take our meals in r cafeteria which always has at least threcoptions for dessen- To illustrate fieedom of choicc with my students, I askthem if they ceo remember which dessen they chose for lunch on a certainday of the previous week. Only those who choose jello every day remember!The rest do not. One of the reasons they do not remember their choice ofdessen is that such a choice does not demand a very deep involvement of theirperso-ns. Freedom of choice, the smorgasbord freedom of choosing amongindifferent goods, is like that. It dos not dernand very much fiom us.On the other hand, basic freedom, the freedom of self-determinarion,involves more. For example, a friend of mine smrggled for several years overwhether he ought to remain in the seminary and proceed toward.priesthood,or withdraw in order to be free to devote his life to working in a ihird worldoountry through an agency of the United Nrtions. He chose the latter. Sucha chgice is an exercise of besic freedom. [t demands more personal involve-ment than choosing iello over cmkies in the cafeteria.The notion of basic freedom, or the freedom of se lf{etermination, restsoo an undersmnding of the human person as a complex multi-leveled being.To illirstrate this I like to diagram the human person as a moving spirrl.Others prder to use the food metaphors ofan onion, anichoke, or cinnamon

Fncdom otd Kruukdge

8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

3/7

Reann lalormed 81 Faith

rol!. The spiral illustrets bctter our heving a cosrnron cnter for erch ofthelevels ofour being. Furthermore, with the spiral we cennot tell clearly whereone level ends and the next begins. This is closer to real life, I think. With espiral, too, we know that each levcl shares a common center and moves outfrom there without ever being disiointed frorn the whole. The spinl is "mov-ing" to capture the temporal dimension of being human and the developmen-tel orienution of the moral life. My diagram lmks like this:

level of extemal possessionsIevel of feelingslevel of convictionscenrer of identity

As the diagram shows, our actions c2n spring from different levels ofourbeing- Not everything we do is a clear and complete embodiment of whatsprings from the deepest core of our being. Some actions might be rrntedthere, but most of our actions spring from a more peripheral level. Thiscautions us to refrain fmm concluding on the basis of isolated.actions alonedut anyone has embodied the full meaning and commitment of the self.What seems more likely is thet we come to actualize who we are through arvhole series of actioas which, when takn together, express the brsic char-acter or dominsnt direction of our lives. This basic direction of our lives,which manifests a rather consistent personal indentity, is our fundanentalstarce. Tlrosr-. significant moments of choice in our lives, which establish oraf6rm more strongly than others the character and direction of our lives, areflndnnettal Etioas.t

Thc Theory of Fundamental OptionBernard Hiring has gone to grcxt length in the fust volume of his Fzsea Fait$al ir Cbrist to give a proper understanding of the theory bf fundr-mental option- He shows that contemporary theology finds biblical roots forthe theory of fundamcntal option in the notions of covenanr aod heart.a Thistheory assumes the basic conviction of the covenantal experience, namely,that we are born graced- That is, God has created us out of love for tove. Weare the good creation of a gracious God. Without destroying our freedom,Godt love for us has so affeced us in our innermost being (i.e., our hearts) asto make a cleim on us and to give us an orientatioD torvard love and life- Ourresponse is to live out of this orientation in freedqn. To agree to live in

Frccdon a Ktrottkdgecovn ot widr God is a basic ect of faidr--the most self-committing choice wecen cvcr rntke. This act of feith is "the" fundamental option. Yet we must liveout this condition in r bmken world----q world where original sin and socialsin abound, and r world where many temptetions and bad influences arise togo(ltradict the very orintation of our innermost beiog, or heaft.

Though more deeply marked by grace than by sin, we elways stand inned of puri$catim eud conversion. This gives a dynamic character to a lifeofconstent growth. Traditioual moral theology understood this basic condi-tion of being human. The clrssic moral manuals began with attention on ourultinrate end and the necessity to make decisions for that Lnd . From a theologi-cal point of view, this end is God calling us into communion with Godt self.Our basic decision is whether we will live our lives responding to God in andthrough all our choices.Fundamntal Stance

Within the context of the fundamental option theory, "fundamentalstance" expresses the sort of person we have cbosen to be, the fundamentaldirection we have chosen for our lives. Itbrings a stable direction, perduringquality, and personal meaniig to our actions. The fundamental stance of theChristian is one which allows the great commandment to function as a criticaliudge of one's relationships and activities.Bemard Hdring has aligned wh4t is entailed by the fundameotal stancewith Eric Erikson's notion of identity.t By this he means that rre cmnot layclaims to having achieved a fundamental direction for our lives until we canlay claim to having achieved a stable identity. For neither identig' nor stancearises dl at once. They come into being through committing ooeself to a wayof life that is stable enough to sustain a perduring quality of life, and in thisway to give personal meaning to actions.Actions taker by themsclves are ambiguous. Situating actions in relationto the fundamental direction of a person's life, however, enables us to dis-cover the personal meaning of actions. Our actions embody, to a greeter orlesser degree, the fundamental dirgction of our lives- They are signs more orless expressive of or interiority. In this sense, our actions are like t}le tip ofen iceberg. They err held above the surfacc by our anitudes, coniictions, andthe fundamental direction of our lives which sek exteroal, concret expres*sicr- To get to the mre meaning of our ections as expressions of ourselves, wenced to look beneeth the surfrce of observable bchavior to the attitudes andconvictions of the person, These-give expression to the fundameqtal directionof our lives and seek coocrete embodiment in panicular actions. Only bylooking beneath the nrrhce of our actions will wc be able to get to the rmts ofmoral conversion, lrealirg, and growth.

8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

4/7

Reaon Inforad 81 FaitbWhen we take srrch an indepdl look at our actions, tve discover that they

may be more or less consistent with the fundauental direction of our lives.This is because our actions arise from differert levels of our being. Not allour ections spring from the deepest center ofoursclves wherein lies the coreof our identity. In dre biblical sense, this is the "hart"-the deepest sourcefrom which we commit ourselves to God and to others aad show whet wemost care &bout or value. The truest expression ofourselves as moral personsarises from there; it does not lie in our extemal ections alone. Moral gcodnessIies in the loving disposition to choose God, while right actions are extemalexpressions of this disposition. The challenge of moral living is to do thoseactions which are consistent with the love of God. The role of the 'heart" inthe moral life gives full force to the bibliel prayers which beseech God for a"pure heart" and give power toJesus' sayings, "Where your beasure is, therewill be your heart" (Mt 6:21), and "Of what the hean is full, the mouth willspeak" (Mt 12:34). The goal of moral growth is to live singleheartedly commit-- ted to God so that our actions are consistent wit}' whom we have chosen to bcthrough that comrnitmenr.Fandanatal Aption

A choice which arises from such a personal depth that it can siguificantlyreverse or reinforce the fundamentel direction of our lives is a firndamentaloption. To qualify as a fundamental option, a choice must be roorcd in a depknowledge of self aud a freedom to commit oneself. Through a fundamentaloption we express our basic freedom of selfuetermination to comrnit our-selves profoundly toward a cenain way ofbeing in the world.Bernard Hiring speaks of the "great decisions" rs specid moments in lifewhich express the fundamental option. These are decisions appropriate tothose who have reached the necessary stage of identity and who are able tocommit themselves in knowledge and with freedon to a community or to aperson. Without any claim to completeness, Hering suggests the followingexamples:

I want to poiot to such fundamcntal decisions as personal choice offaith in Jesus Christ and in the role and missiort of the Church,. made by an adult or an adolescent who his already reached thenecessary stage of identity. I would lisi among such choices: adultbaptism as sign of personal cosmitment to Chdst and covenantwith the Church-and since adult baptism is the exception in theWest, I would note confirmation as a meture ratification of whatGod offers us in baptism; marriage vovs; the vows of celibacy forthe kingdom of God; a decision that is the test of deep and true

Fiendship or of selfgiving love; tie deliberate choice of a professionsuch as that ofa physician or of a politician with r firm commitmentto the positive thos,6Pope Johr Paul II has used the notion of fundanental option in a similarsense in his document on catechetics, Cdtecf,cti Tradcndaz,' in 1979. Whens?erking about the youth, he writes:With youth comes the moment of the first great decisions. Al-rhough the young may enioy the suppon of the members of theirfamily and their hiends, they have to rely on rhemselves and theirown conscience and rnust ever more frequently and decisively as_sume responsibility for their destiny. Good rnd evil, grace anti sin,life and death will more aild more confront one another withiuthem, not jusi as moral categories but chiefly as fundamental options which they must accept or reject lucidly, conscious of theirown responsibility (Par. 39).2

These statements of theologiaa Bernard Hdring and of pope John paul IIsuggest that those fundemental decisions which affecr the ba;ic-direqtion ofo.ur-lives are not made quickly, or easily. We must be ruly ready for them onall levels of our personelity. These statements also show thaifuirdamentalchoices aie deeply rooted in the relational character of our lives- Our basicdecisions have to do with our commimtent to our own integriry and identity,our commitment m odrers, and our sense of responsibiiity to the worldaround us. If these basic decisions are made soundly and noi precipitously,they can well esrablish dre direction of our lives so as to resisi thoie strongdetermining forces which are constandj' warring against us fighting to makius someone else.Fradm of Choice

The other kind of freedom at stake in the moral life has to do withrealizing our capacity to be ourselves through the particular choiceg we make.This is what most people call moral freedom, thbugh rnoralists call it moreproperly freedom of choice.. Freedom of choice--a smorgasbord kind of freedonr-

8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

5/7

,az Reana lalotmcd Bl Faitbthe nore we will be able either to overcome those we cin or to live moreear.Iv within the limits of those which we cannot ovroome'"'-i'"ow.tt t ,". ne frcm Onc FIat Axt * C'ukoo\ N6t bings homc thisfr.# oi "f,"ice gt"phicetly, end shows what we should all bc about in ourlnJ *i"i"s * ;d*ib6.dults. In t$s nwel' McMurpiy fakes iosanity* "*"o" " dU farit for the softer life of a mental institution' However' heill. t La-" -llision with Big Nurse, the tyrrmt of tbe ward who hasni"JA.gi*ffy emascuhted her pe-tients so that they can no )onger haveiriL. io "ttiot.. McMurphy begins r one-man campaigu against-tyranny;Jf* fr""d.-. Io -" s."o" hJ"t"go " showdown yq B-tg ryYt: !ycalling for a vote which would allow the patients m wetch the li't/ofld Denesii, ii. H" i. on uo." short of a maiority' It is up to Chief' the big Indianwho, to escape the pains of tyranny, has retired into r fog whert he- cannoth.rr'"t d ""n'.rnt ,p"uk. McMurphy pleads with him to raise his hand' Chief6n& his hrnd going up, and he 'ays to himself:

It's too late to stop it now. McMurphy did something to it.that firstday, put somc kind of hex on it. . . . McMurphy's got hidden wiresholkid to it, lifting it slow iust ro get me out of the fog-and into theopen where I'm fa-ir game He's doing it, wires ' No, that's notthe mrth. I lifted it mvself.sThis is the goal of moral striving- We need to cut short olr-attemPted

escroes from frJdom .o th"t *e cri responsibly claim, "l did it myselll"nr*o* tna rcsponsibiliry go hand in hand. Responsible frecdom..says' "lchme to do this'bec",rre,'"i , responsible person' I uczl to do it'" This isouite different from the familiar, "i really should ' " or "l had bmer ' ' .''Jr'l must. . . ." These all indicate motivation from without' Whenever wefind ourselves saying'Acnrally I should . - -" chanccs are that we really y'ooo, *".,, ,o, *" ia"l'*a" "*t*al pressure to, there are possible rewards ifse do, or punishmenrc if we do not- A cuckoo's nest mey be 4n extremeinugs ior tiie *orld in which we live, yet the nurotic is ' clear image of theA"ti;inea conditions which we all share. The neurotic suggests thrt thetwmnv of determining influencs over which we seem to have no codtrol has-"d" Jo*.rl"rsn.s oir chief neurosis. We all have a Big Nurse in our lives'Th* is inevitable. With Chief we often retreat into the fog and attempt toesirye from freedornHowever, our freedom to choose this or that---ven within limits-isfundamcntelly *fteedom to choose an identity, to bccome a certain son ofpcrson. We cannot do carything. Determining factors prwent rhat' But wecan pour ourselves into what we do, make it truly our own, choose it as agoiine expression of ourselves which asserts our integrity' The freedom of

Frudom aad Kru edgcour moral striving does not mean doing iust anything we want to do. Rather,the freedom of our moral striving is wanting to do what we can do. Moralfrcedom is an act of self-determination, an act which, through all the path-ways of partidar choices, chooses who we want to be, persoas either openor cloed to thc nystcry ofour livcs end of all life.

KnowledgeIf the actual stuff of moral freedom is not a.choice between in(lividualobtlcts, but rarher the self-realiz{tion of the person choosing, then this dle-

men( of being a mord person must also be present in moral knowledge. Thismeens thar the object of moral knowledge is primarily not something outsidethe person, but it is the free moral person in all his or her concreteness andpossibilities.The moral life entails two kiods of knowledge conceptual and evalua-tivc.e Conceptual knowledge, the explicitly formulated cousciousness ofmoral reality, is necessary for passing on moral wisdom from generation togencration and for living in a moral community which shares a commondiscourse about rnoral experience. But conceptual knowledge is not to beequated with genuine morhl knowledge- Evaluative knowledge, on the otherhand, counts as genuine moral knowledge for it calls fonh decisions andactions expressive of one's moral freedom. Without any degree of evaluativeknowlulge we could not live as moral persons in the full sense of that term-CoacEtaal Knuwlzdge

Conceptual knowledge in the moral life penains both to a knowledge ofself and to a knowledge of moral values. It is what most pcople mean whenthey speak of moral knowledge, though it is not whrt moralists mean bygenuine moral knowledge.C,onceptual knowledge is symbolized by the hcad.to k is the kind of

knowledge we have when we have the right ioformation and have masteredthe facts. It is dre kind of knowledge which is fairly easy to grasp ead toverify, for we only need to double check our observxtions, our facts, ourlogic. We cen easily comfiunicate this kind of knowledge thmugh preaching,teaching, and sharing since wc can detach the facts from the knowdr and thecircumstances to make them readily available to anyone who wants them.C.oncepruel knowledge of the self comes as a result of being an obiect ofour own scrutiny and being able to express what we discover. Psychologicaltests, for example, help us to attain this kind of awareoess. Through suchtesting we can know our fundamental limits and basic potentids, our person-ality preferences, or whether we have any character disorders. Whatever wecen do to enhance our criticel, conceptual awareness would serve our mpral

8l

8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

6/7

Rewon Informcd Bl Faitb Fncdom ad Ktutlcdge 85lives well sine the badc conditions of our unique identity influence the waywe interpret moral reJity and the responses we cln make.Coriceptual self-sw:reness has some important implicetions for themoral llfe. Right mord living, for instance, involves expressing ourselvesaccording to the capacities we have. While v/e .r fimrrlly rcquired to cxFessourselvd eccordiag toour crPacities, no one is mordly obligeted to do whatlr or she is incepoble ofdoing. Sensitive pastorrl rnonl gui&oce will respectdre limited capocity ofr person and not imPoee what e Person is incepobh ofatt3ining.

Since our predispositions will give us a certain amount ofeese or troublewith different virnres, we would do well to know our proclivities so that wewill know when we are acaing with them or straining against them. We onlyfrustrare ourselves urorally by running ahead of our graces, i.e., by trying tolive bevond our means. We incur guilt unnecessarily if we comPare our ownmord effons with thcee of someone with a capacity different from our own,We need to leam, then, the limits and potentials which are ours both ashumans rnd rs unique individuals. A basic demand ofChristian morality is tolive ,ccording to the graces we have received. The goal of moral striving,then, is ro bcomc what God hes mede us to be by appropriating our capaci-ties and developing our potatial within th limits ofour natural endowrnent-In this way we live out ofour blessings ind give thanks and preise to God byusing n'ell what is ours. Livin{ in this way makes the moral life a continuousexpression of praise and thanksgiving to God who has endowed us withdifferent gifts or with different degrees of the same gifu.In matters pertaining to moral values, conceptud knowledge is tnowl-edge about values. It comes with a knowledge of morel rules and the strate-gies for doing what the rules prescribe. We use conceptual moral knowledgeto communicate values and to argue for or against a position.However, conceptual knowledge is the least convincing kind of knowl-edge for achieving mord conversion. We do not change what we or anotherperson mey value simply on th basis of the right information or ratiorlalexplanations. We changc our values on the basis of experiencing a value assatisfying ir basic need. Moreover, we do not mrke our moral decisions on thebasis of bare fects, nor do we exercise our moral iiredom in e disinterestedway. A nrre conceptual grrsp that a pcniculer coursc of action is right orwrong is not enough to cnsune that a person will act in a vimrous way, A'iimrous responsc requires that the person has interiorized the vrlues inherentin the action. A personal commitment to value is an essential dimension ofmoral behavior. So, while cnnceptual knowledge is important and necessaryfor the moral life, it abne is not sufficient if we rre to ect as rrcrdly virtuouspersons. We also need waluative knowledge.

fudaatile KnuolcdgeMoral knowledge, properly so called, is evaluative knowledge. t r It is thebern's knowledge and so is diffcult to express in concep6. We cen rcognizeit in the knowledge lovers have of one another. For example, when we want a

friend to koow someone we truly love, wc excitedly try to give all thedescriptioos of our love dut we can. Try es we might, we cannot close thegrp betwen our prsonel knowledge of the one we love end otrr descriptions.Faced with the limitations ofconceptual media rnd the incommunicabitity ofwhlat the hqrt knows, we finally say in frustradon, "You'll iust h.ve to meetmy love!" That is it exectly. Only through personal encounter will anyoneelse be able to know what we know by hean. Even then degrees of knou'ingwill differ. That is how evaluative knowledge work.Evaluative knowledge, symbolized by rhe heart, is the kind qf knowl-edge we have when we are "caught up" in someone or something throughpersonal involvement or commitment. Evaluativc knowledge is more per-sonal, more self-involving than conceptual knowledge of facts or ideas, for ithas to do with grasping the quality of a person, obiect, or event. We do nergain evaluative knowledge by words but by touch, sight, and sound, byexperiencing victories and failures, sleeplessness and devotion.In shon, evaluative knowledge is a felt knowledge which we discoverttrough personal itrvolvement and reflectio. !t is not something which caneasily be passed on through statements, formulas, or rules. A Pcouts cartoonooce captured the sense of evaluative knowledge well in a scene which hasPeppermint Patty sining at her school desk and speaking out to her teacher:"You know what Oscar Wilde said, !la'am? He said, 'Nothing thrt is wonhknowing can be taught.'Nodring pcrsorul, Ma'am . . . Carry on." While wenuy not want to agree with Oscar Wilde's statemnt atrsolutely, it doescoovey the significence of eveluetive knowledge as the kind of knowledgewhich is not easily taught in a deached way but must be evoked rnd caughtil our experiences. The most we can hope for in trying to communicateeqluative knowledge is to occasion similar experiences of this value for an-otlrcr so as to draw out of another the value experienced -As it pertains to dre self, eveluative lnowledge touches the deepest levelof ourselves as persons. It is diffiorlt to gresp frrlly or to express dlequatelynot only for oneself but also for others bectuse it is knowledge of such adceply personal reality. This implies that we need to refrrin from making anabcolute and final ludgment not only about our own moral status before Godbut also about sorneone else's. If we do not have a full or clear grasp ofo rselves, how much rnore difficult it is to have a total, explicit grasp ofsomeone elsc's true rnoral self. We bave ao window into another pcrson's soulw{rich would allow us to see clearly enough where she or he stands before

8/14/2019 FrKn Gula

7/7

li6 Reasor Informed. By FaithEVALUATIvEKNOWLEDGE

Fncdon ad KxwlcdgeFEATUBE CONCEPTUALKNOWLEDGE God in order to make a moral iudgment of absolute condemnation, elen iftbrt prson's observable patterns of behavior are destructive of human u,.e!l-

being, The teaching of the Council of'lient on iustification claimed as much.It declares that no one but God crn know q,-ith absolute certitude anyonc'sconditioa before God. uAs it pertains to value, evaluative knowledge is the self-involving knou,l-edge whic-h males de.ciding and acting on behalf of what u,e value tiuly ourou,z. Without this knowledge we ict rnerely bv hearsay, by rvhar we are told isright, rather than on the basis of what we have discovered to be valuable. 'l'hiskind ofknowledge is not acquted nor altered t hrough ia tion a I a rgu ment alone,but by personal experience, discovery, and appreciatiou of moral values.The accomprnying chart summariz.es some of the distinguishing charac,teristics of conceptual and evaluative knou.ledge. Since rhese approaches rofreedom and knowledge have had a profound effcct on the ways v,e underrstand and cvaluate sin. we turn, nextr 10 the issue uf sin.

Notesl. On rhe influence of drese "givens," see James l\{. Gustafson, 6arrErhies Be Cbrbt;an? (Chicago: Universitv of Chicago Press, 1975), pp. 32-3a;also, Vincent Rush, TDe Rn1rttsible Cbristian (Chictgo: l,oyola Universiry

Press, 1984), pp. 32-48.2. Tbe Peauabh Kingdon $'Jotre Dame: University of Notre DamePress, t983), pp. 37-38.3. Not all theologians who use the fundamental option theory employthe distinction betwen fundamental stance and fundamenral oprion as Timo-t\ O Connell does in his book, Pnzc iplu for a Catholic Moraliry (Ncw York:The Seabury Press, 1978); see especially pp. 64-66, 70-74. Bernard H?iring,for example, gives,a lengthy treltment of the fundamental option theorywithout making this distinction. See his Frre and Faithful it Cbrist, Yol. 1:G.rreral Morsl Tholog (New York: The Seabury Press, t978), pp. 16+-222.. However, I6ndusingthe term'bption" (u,hich ordioarily coonotes a parricu-lar momnt of choice) m refer to "basic direcrion" or "orientarion" of life to bemisleading, O'Connell's distinction seems to capture the heart of the funda-mental option theory wit}out building in unnecessary confusion.4.'Hering, Fne and Faithful in Christ, Yol. 1: ()ewra! ll'Iorul l bcLtllLtg(New York The Seabury Press, 1978), pp. 164-222i for his secrion on the"heart" as it relates to the theory of fundamental option, see pp. 185-1ij9.5. Ibid.,pp.16vt77,fslp. W. t72-17 s.6. Ibid., p. 189.

7. Pope John Paul ll, Cttubri' Tradezrla:, "Apostolic Exhortation on

Swnbol Heed Heen

C.ontent Right information; "mas-ter tlr facts." Quality or vrluc of someoneor something.Verifable Easily verifed since the

facts can be observed andthe logic demoostrated.Dif6cult to verify since thequality or value escapes easydemonstration and logical ex-position.

Acquired Can be easily learned, fortight information is rfrefor teacbing, preaching,aad sharing.

Quality and value must becaught through personal in-teraction end encounter.

Communicated Information or facts areeasily detached from theknower and the situarion,so thy 4re easy to passon,

Since quality aod value arenot easily deached fiomknower and situation, com-ftunication is difficult andmust be discoverui to be appteciated.

Morality This is the knowledge ofrules and tlre strategies fotachieving what the nrlespresciibe; this is koowl-fue about v&te-

This knowledge is a personalgrasp ofvalue. This is whatmakes our actions truly ouroarz. With this knowledge,r,ve ect on the basis ofwhetwe truly v.lue. Mor.l8rofih aod cooversion haP.peo drrough the experienceof value and acquiriog eval-uative knowledge.