-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
1/8
Tk Formation of Corcicncc t37
I.fn rbe moral education of aduhs, the pastoral prioriry is to
enable
people to make their own moral decisions in light of the
guidance of scriprureand drc teaching ofthe church. This means not
so much providing answers tonioral questions as encouraging the
process of arriving at a moial decision.This brings us squarely
into the domain of the formation of conscience.
The Range of Interest inForming Conscience
Often, discussions ibout the formation of conscience are
preoccupiedwith_ answering the practical moral quesdon, .What ought
I m do!" Theemphasis then is necessarily placed on what we need in
order to make apanicular moral choice (consciencty'3). However,
when the right ,.choice"becomes of primary interest, the formation
of conrcience becomJs a matter ofacquiring the Decessery skills for
making right judgments. These are suchskills as the ability to
assess morally relwant lactorsJuch as the action
itself,rotnuon,.cucumsmnces, consequeoces, values, and norms;
the ability toconsider all sides of an issue; the ability to
provide sound reasons for a moraliudgment; and the_ a_bllity to
have a deiisive wilt ro execute a iudgmeau Thisis rhe process o-f
lelberation proper to conscience/2. Certainly,-the naturallaw
radition of Catholic moral theology encourages this kind of
thinking.According to the nrtural law traditioo,-io be mora-i is to
be reasonable. Tf,e
.Catholic radition of natural law has been very optimistic about
reason andhas placed a premium in the.moral life on ieveloping the
capacities forexercising reason righdy.
- Our approaches ro moral educatiol and the rnoral development
of con_science in recent years heve been dominated by sudr a point
;f view. Craig
nyfsra.lgfrtl cat]-s it_'iuridical ethirs.a A primc exarnple of
this point ofview, with its implicetions for mol'al education and
the development of thcmoral coascienc, cln be found in the theories
of Lrwrence Koblberg. Ac_ording to his theories, the rnorel life is
primarily a nrner of meking df,oiceson the basis of rcason. Ivloral
development is e matter of ecquiring the abilityto provide
increasingly more principled reesons ro iustifi thjsc choiceJ.
. . One of the dangers of this approach is that it cgn too esily
split theintinate connection between religion end morality iu our
lives. Riligiousbcliefs, forexample, too easily become disperrsable
baggage in tlie m.oral life,since rnoral choices can be defended on
grounds other tlpn religious ones.Another danger with KoNberg,s
approach is that, if we limit the f6rmation ofconscience to.the
devloF ent of moral reasoning for making a decision, weseverely
restrict what is involved in morality and in the Christian
conscience,and we oversimplify both.
While making a reasoned choice is indeed an important interest
in themoral life, it is not the whole of morality. We hrve already,
seen in ttIe firstchapter that the_twofold range of iaterest of
moral theology includes not onlymeking moral decisions but also
forming morel character. The interest in9hlacte1 agpealed again
under the considerations for determining sin. There Iindicated that
determining sin is not a matter of examinirg isolated
actionsagainst a set of moral rules, but involves discerning the
orientation and commit-ment of the person. We en expect, therefore,
that the forrnation of cu$ciencewill involve more dran sinply
ens[ring the prectical moral question, ..Whatought I to do?" It
must also address the prior moral questim, ..Wh.t sorr ofperson
ought I to become?" This means the aim of the formation
ofconscienceis not simply to increase : person's knowledge of facts
and values, or skills forresolving a moral dilemma. It must also
include the fuller tfrcure of the per-son's moral character. As
long as we can remember that moraliry is interestedin ubowe an, as
well as in oicl and b,u we cboou, thurwewill not eliminatecharacter
from our considecation oftlre formation ofconscience.
Conscience is pmperly forrned in didogue with several sources of
moralwisdom. As Dzzazs we cmsult our own experience as well as the
experienceof family, friends, colleagues, aod expens in rhe field
which prtai;s to thearea of iudgment at hand. We enalyze and test
the stories, images, language,ritua!, an! actions by wliich the
various communities in whiitr we irtici-pa.te live the moral life.
As Cbistians we turn to tlre testimony of scripture,
. tlre religious convictions of our creeds, the lives of moral
vinuosos, and theinfo-rmed iudgment of ttmlogians past and present
who help interpret thetraditions of Christianlife Cbistiaa
cormulzirier have access toa rich Leritageof-stories, images,
language, rituals, devotional practices, and spiritual
disci-pliires which nurtur onb moral vision and practice. Thse
cornmunities
heFormationofConscience
lt6
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
2/8
l Srl Rcam Inforncd fu Faitb
have dso ofhcial steteurents of morel teaching from its leeders
to give guid-rnce in rreas of specific moral concern. As Cabolia we
py attention o ourrich beritage of storics, images, and prackcs as
well rs o drc official tcxch-ings of the magisterium vhich arc
pertinent to our rrcas of encem.- Thc gopee formetion of conscience
uscs dcsc sources of monl wisdorrto inform thc four poins ofinorel
andjisis which we took from Jernes Gusaf-son and inroduced in
Chepter I under thc coraidcrrtion of dr prectical levelofmonl
theology. Thoce four points arq the rgent; beliefs; situationel
analy-sis; erd rmnl norms. A.lthough all work together in the
formrtion and func-tioning of conscience, for purposes of analysis
here we will correlate whatpertains to the agent and beliefs with
conscience and chrncter, and corrclatcwh*t penains to situational
analysis and moral norms with conscicnce anddecision making.
C.onscience and Character
Pelhaps the most serious danger in,concentrating merely on
choosingand acqrririag rnore priocipled rcasons for the choices we
make is that we failto deal sdquately with dre formation of
cbarutet Attention to character hrsbeen the sorely neglected side
of the formation of conscience. Some theolo-gians today ,re
encouraging greater attention to charader as the more impor-trnt
sidc of tbe moral life.z These theologians are saying that who we
arematters mordly. If a iudgment of conscience is to be a response
from thehean, then much depends on character, or virtuc, We need to
explore themoral import of .who we rre" and to give full weight to
all the facmrs whichinfluence the formation of character.
Moral choices are not made in a vacuum. They are made by people
whosee the world in a certain way because rhey have become
particular sons ofpeople. The very way we describe a situation and
the kinds of choices wemake follow from the kind of character we
have. Character gives rise tochoice. Choices in turu confirm or
qualify character, for choices rrc self-determining, In choosing to
adopt one or another course of action, we rnakeourselves into stain
sorts of persons. Heroes, heroines, and saints illusrrrtethis mosi
vividly when they rdfusc to compromise on matters which seem
toothers oflitde precticzl imporance. Once again, Thonus More
porurys thiswell in Robert Bolt's dnma. The following scene takes
place in dre ieil bellwhea Thomas More's deughter, Mergaret, cornes
to pusurde him to swear tothe Act of Succesion:
MC)RE: You want ms to swear to the Act of Succession?
MARGARET: 'God more rcgands the thougha of the hcert thenthe
words of tbe mouth. " Or so you've always told me.
Tb Fonuthn of Cotrcicncc I 19
MORE Ycs.
MARGARET: Thcn sey tlrc wcds of the oath rnd in your heartthink
otherwise.
MORE: What is gn oadr then but words we ssy to fu?MARGARET:
Thet's very neat.
MORE Do you mean, it isn't rrue?
MARGARET: No, it's true.
MORE: Then it's a poor argument to call it "neat," Meg. When
aman takes an oath, Meg, he's holding his own self in his ownhands.
Like water. (Ilc cup bb ha s) Ardrf he opens his fingersrlar---he
needn't hope to 6nd himself again. Some men aren'tcapable of this,
but I'd be loath to think your father one ofthem,t
This scene emphasizes that any choice which rcally involves free
self-determination includes one's whole self with it. Thomas More
shows thatwben we do not act according to our character, our very
self cln be lost,Mrd choices are fundementally matters of
intcgrity: we ect in character orout of character.
What is this "character" which is so imporunt in the moral life?
Wheowe 'size people up" to gpt a glimpse of their character, what
do we attend to?We p4y attention to pettems of actions which
reflect anitudes, dispositions,the readiaess m lmk on things in
certain ways and m choose in cenain ways.These are indices of
charactcr, sincr character shows itself in its fruits.Cherecter
itentifies 6e responsive orienution of e pcrson: secing the
world
as a hostile of friendly plrce, or being a person who loves rnd
helps or onewho is fearfrrl end sel6sh.We acquire charactci by
directing our freedon to loyalties outside our-
sdves. Christirn cherecet,, for eremple, is foimcd by directing
our freedom'to thc prson and message of Jesus as the ultimate
center of our loyalty.Cherecter is whrt rcults from the vdues we
mekc our own. Wheo a vdue haswoven its way into the fabric of our
being, we dclight in doing what pertainsto Szt veluc. The iust
person "iusticcs" and the loving person loves with suchsse that wc
say such actions are "second nature" to these pmple.
Characterpredispo,ses us to choose in cemin ways, even tbough it
does not predeter-rnine cvery droice. We can ect against chrracter,
and by meking new choiceswe en chrnge our cherecrer.
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
3/8
140 Reaor @onud 81 Faitb
Connimce, Cbtrmter, aid VbiolVisior end cboia arc t:vto key
concepts which perain to conscicncc and
charecter. Clearly, vision is prior to choice in the moral life.
After all, wedrcose what we do on tlrc basis of whet we see, rnd we
see whet we serbecause of who we art, our cherectcr. Think for a
moEttrt: Wbet reallymakes us morally different? Is it the specific
choices we meke? Meny of usma&c thc srme choiceer to pay taxst
to rtsist violence, to visit the sick. Werre morally different
because of the underlying vision which provides thefoundarion for
attitudes aod choices.
Philosopher Iris Murdoch, who has contributed some foundetional
ideasto today's interest in vision and character, explains that we
differ not becausewe choose differently, but because we see
differently:
When we apprehend and assess other people we do nor consideronly
their solutions to specifiable practical problems, we
corxidersomething more elusive which may be called their total
vision oflife, as shown in their mode of speech or silence, their
choice ofwords, their assssmeots of others, their conccption of
their ownlives, what they think attractive or praise-wonhy, what
they thinkfunny: in shon, thc configurations of their thought which
showcootinudly in their reactions and conversation. These
things,which rnay be overdy and conprehensibly displayed or
inwardlyelaborated and guessed at, constitute what, making
different pointsin the two metaphors, one may call the texture ofa
man's being orthe nature ofhis personal vision.l
From this te can conclude that the first task of the formatioo
of conscience isthe attempt to help us sec.
The modtil of responsibility for the moral life indicates that
we respondto what we see. Before we can answer the question, "What
ought I to do?" weneed to ask, "What is going on?" This is the
question ofvision. In fact, mostof what appears in our decisions
and actions is the result of what we see goingon, rrther than the
result of conrious rational choices. For example, if welook on our
children es a burden, we refrrse to carry them; if we look on
ourcolleagues as competitors, we refuse to cooperrte.with them.. ,
The "seeing" which is an expression ofour character is more than
takiog
a look. Seeing is interpreting and valuing as well. What we
regard as wonhyof our response depends on how we "view" it. For
example, "My wife is anag-," "My employer is bossy," 'My snrdents
are eager'are ways of secingwhich profoundly influence our choices.
But these ways of seing heve notlr-ing direcdy to do with the
logical application of rules.''fhey havi to do with
Tk Fotmatior of Conscince
thc imag$ through which we grasp what we see. What we sec sets
thediroction and limits of what we do; it generates certain choices
nther tha[other; and it disposes us to respond in one way rather
than tnother. what ist choice for sorneone else rnay nevr occur to
us rs a choicc at ell, for wesimply do not see the world that
way.
Co*ciance, Visian, and Story
The imponance of vision and character for understanding thg
moraliudgments ofconrience cannot tre emphasized enough. Most
people most ofthe time do not make moral choices in the 6rst
instance on rhe basis ofimpersonal rules, rational absuactions, or
logical procedures. Many of ourmoral decisions do not call for rhe
leisure ro sit down and ponder the rationaldimensions, general
principles, and logical procedures which go into everychoice. More
often than not, the analysis which discovers such dimensionsand
pr
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
4/8
14342 Rcosu Inlonud 81 Faitb
hoperly m understend rnonl bclnvior, than, we nd to Pay
ettentionfust to tlie inmges shaping tbe imaginetion, tnd fie
storis givitrg risc to thqseimrges, beforc we osidcr rnord rules.
We live rnorc by smries thau rre doby rules. Alt of this tdls us
thet learning moral ruls is not the 6rst tesk in dreformetion
ofeonsciencc. We fust need to learn lora to see.
To r grcat atent, our vision is not somethiog we provide for
ctrselvesby orrselves. A morel vision is not so much cbeen es it is
bhcrited ftom oursocial worlds. Vision i! r community achicvement.
Social scientists tell usthrt as we grow, the visbn we rquire is in
pert the result of intcmalizing thebcliefs rod values, causes and
loyrltics of the community which meLe up ourenvironment. Our vision
is almoet wholly dePerrdent on our relationships, onthe worlds in
which wc live, and on the commitments we have made. As aresult, the
morality into which we are socielized is not a set of rules trut
acollection ofstories and images of what makes life wonh
living.
James Gustafson cites a personal experience which illustrates
well howhis participation in a religious family and a church
community which lived bythe religious belief "God is love" shaped
tris character and vision. He saysthat the church building of his
childhood had across its front a painting of theGethsemanc scene,
rnd abovc it was printed, "fu is love," The iuxtaposi-tion of the
anguish and suffering of Gethsernane with the affirmation "God
islovc" mede an indelible impression oo him. This visual image,
togedrer withexposure to prerching or I John 4 by his pastor (who
also happened to be hisfathcr), as well as the experience of human
relationships in which the affirma-tion of God's love was embodied,
came together to shape his character and hisawareness of beiog
loved by God even in moments of his spiritual suffcring
ofuncertainty and doubt-t Gustafson's exprincc shows how both the
histori-cal experience of the cocrmunity of the church which gave
formal cxpressionto the conviction'God is love," and his lived
personal exFrience of humanrelationships which effrmed that
conviction, entered into the formation ofhis awareness rnd helped
sustain him even when circumstances might hrveled him to obicct to
such a conviction.. Yet the world of family and church are not thc
only worlds we live in.Religious ttlicfs and stories are not tre
only ones shrping our lives. Each ofus irihebits many overlapping
worlds at the seme time. The forriration ofconscience takcs
place.in these coomunities so that one's consciencc reflectsiri
many wrys 6e velues end loyalties of dre mom influentiil
cornmunities.Fbr example, why do parents worry about where dreir
children go to school,about the frieuds they mrke, about what thcy
do in their free time, about thetelevision shows tbey watch? They
worry because the inner spirit, or theconscience, is shaped rnd
devel,opcd by the strircnrres within which we live,by whrt we see,
end by what w'e do- To speak only moral rules to ourchildren and to
expect that this will make them vinu
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
5/8
Rcaon hlormcd By Faitb Tbe Formatbn of Conscierce 145
meny forms of communicetiog that loydty. Rules and regulations
try to doit, but sories, images, rioels do it better. Thmugh these
laner means, wecome to se what life ceotered rround the mnvictions
of these comnunities isebout, 8nd how life is m be lived. The more
we panicipate in the stories,rituals, images, and languqe of c
cocrmunity whicir has i gret influence onus, thc more we begin to
rle on is way ofseeing.
Trke the."community" or world ofcollege and professional
football, forlanp!9.. The wcekly exposure to the apnual fell ritu:l
of the quest to be"No. lI has an unmistakable impact on our
imagioations. Without this fallriturl and image, as well es the
stories which go with it, foorbell season wouldbe less exciting.
But once we get immersed in the world of spons v.irh itsstories and
images, we have a hard time seeing what is going on anywhereelse.in
any other way- For example, we may even 6nd ourselves ulking
aboutheving "togain yardage" oa a deal, or "to run interference"
for a collcague, orito punC' in order to get out of a !am. We may
even begin to approach allforms of human interaction with the image
of "No. 1." It tells ui someonemust win and sommne must lose, When
everyone is out to be victoriouslyundefeated, aggressive
coapetirioo, not ha;ony, reigns supreme. Whjneveryone is out to be
"Nc. 1," then our lives become filied with compoitionand colflict,-
and our styles of interaction become .a mixture of
aggr;ssivelyoffersive and staunchly defeosive behavior.
|he *iftri.y .pr1eoled by the entenainment communiry
comperes.mostinrersely with the Christian communty,s. Willam F.
Fore'j book,'Taie-
visbtr ud Religion: Tbe Sbqbg { Feitb, Vatues, atd Cultan,
rnaintains thattelevision is usurping the rcle of the church in
shaping the irnagination andour system ofvalues. He says,
Television, rether than the churches, is becoming the place
wherepeople 6nd a worldview which reflects what to them ij of
ultimatevalue, and which justifes their behavior and way of
life.r
Few television viewers are so firm-ly established in their value
commitmeotsas to go unouched by the persistent promotion of the
values and behavioralpatrcms-which television programs transmit.
For example, consider the num_ber of "farnily" programs which do
not prize marital fidelity, or which por_nay their central
characters as single and free ro explore a wide rangl
ofinterpersonal dynamics, or whose humor is carried by sexual
innuendo,Telwision is a powerful source of influence on aftitudes
;nd behaviors il thearees ofliolence and sexualiiy.s For children,
it is in cartoons. For adults, itcomes through situation omedies,
soap operas, and policc dramas. Suchprograms pottray violence rnd
coercion ls natural pans of sexuality and tellus that the young,
the strotg, rnd ttre beautiful are the ones who irt sexual
rnd need loving. These programs rensmit many inrages of wtat
makes lifeworthwhile which stand in direct conflict with thc imiges
of the gospel androb religious stories and images of their power to
move people.e
In addition to the television prograrns themselves, consider how
mrny ofour prefrencs rnd ways ofevalurting whet is worthwhile in
pcrsons and in
life ere shaped by thc powerful images cornmunicated thrmgh the
cleverworld of edvertising. Recall the number of television
commercids which tellus that enough is not enough, qYou need more .
, .'; .,Get more out of lifeby. . . ." The advertising world's
pursuit of .more. communicates a visioriabout life and how to live
it meaningfully. We can soon take this vision ofconsumerism and use
it to interpret the whole of our lives and our relation-ships. When
we begin to look upon all our activities and pople rvith a senseof
insufficiency and know that whatever we have is not enough, the
newest,or the most improved, then we ha've been converted by rhe
images of theworld of advertising. The rest ofour lives will soon
tbllow in Lind.
The stro.tg influence of the business world on moral vision end
moralcharacter was graphically bmught home to me while I was
watching theOregon Sllkespeare:n Festival's production of Arthur
Mlllels Dcath
of eSalsmm. This pby is a strong indictment of- socieqr for its
frilure to provideits memte-rs with a wonhy vision of life. The
vision which ultirnately de-stroys Willy l-oman is bom out of his
belief in unrestrained individualismand his worship of success.
Willy could not male this vision oi life work. Thecompetition of
the business world, and the preszures of a success-orientedl'orld
in which respect is earned by achievemnt! eventually drives him
mad-In a world which Imked upon love, acceptaoce, and respect as
something tobe earned by achievement, failure was unbearable. The
"successful" vision ofWilly Loman's world finally led him to
suicide. Pan of his tragedy is that hehad no other story to rcplace
the vision his business world hed given him.
These examples of the religious world ofJames Gustafson rnd the
non-religious worlds of sports, television, advertising, and
business give us a senseof ways our vision-is shaped by the
multiple worlds in which we live. Eachworld comrnuriicates what is
"good" and how life ought to be lived. Theseexamples show clearly
that most of what wc see does not lie in front of oureyes but
behind them in the images which make up our imaginations. Imagesand
the imagination, then, are extemely important for the moral
life.
Conriatce, Inaginat in, andCbristian Storizs
The-irnegination is r powerful moral resowce, not to bc equated
withmere fantasy or make-believe. As we sau' in Chapter 5 on the
humrn person,the imagination is our capaciry to consftucr our
worlds. By meanj of the
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
6/8
r46 Rcnn l{ornal By Faitb Th Fomation {Cwciencc t47
im{inrtive proc6s' wc bring together divcrse exPcriencd into a
mernilgfirl*Ufi.. Wtt"it *. "gtt 6e picturi" we have comc to .a
irmge which helps ustxlt all the divcrsc forts aietber so that we
en undetstrnd whet is going on'lnd so rchte to it eipropriitety.
Human bchsviq is a function nd so much of
the rnmalpropociti6ns
-mcholds a" true, but of the imegindon hdding *e
imaqs which sive us r "dicture' of the wmld- ln forming our
conscicnccs forthe irke of rna-king a moa pagm.nt, then, we need to
be criticdly den toimaces at Dlay h our imrginations.-Our
ittitgi*tiont aetermlne whet we see and so influence -how we
re-spond. Every-teacher knows the powe6 of apt er
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
7/8
Rcaw Infond $ Faitb
Thc third rnd fourdr questions .re rrrrr rod ralar.'Driviog 55
mph hasdiftrcnt monl meaning wheo it is donq in e school zone rt
three o'clock thenwhcn it is donc on Interstete 80. And wc ell
lnrow thc differeacc betwcenyclling "6re" o e rife nnge or in e
cmwded movic dre{ter.
t l d Hou rrednc next two questioos. llcy elso hrvc something to
dowith charecter. Wly is the criticd qucstion of nptivrdon that
sends us bcck tocbrify our nelues. Whrt bots lilc love.t th taicl l
n'cl mi[fit truly bc rnanipu-lrdon rt dre oiyln el. For examph, why
do I cale 6r my eiling pcrents? ls thisan exprcssion of love rnd
sincer: crre on my parg or do I intcnd to guer4ntee asubstrntial
crrt of the inheritance? Why do I give such large donations to
St.Jude's Hospiul? To pmmote the efforts of healdr care and
rese*rch crrried onthere, or to qualify for a sizable tax
deduction? "The last temptation is thegreatest treasoni to do the
riht deed for the wrong reason," ts Thomas aBecket puts it in T. S
. t)iot's play, Murdcr in tb CatMrsl.
But ire never do enything for only one reason. We are a mixed
bag ofmot,,'es and conditioning factors, some of whicb are
conscious and some areoot, A description ofonly conscious motives
does not adequately account forthe complex cruses of our behavior,
Aaswering thc uly question well, then,demauds a grc.t deal of
personal honesty and integrity. Sometimes it mayrequire
psychdogicel or psychoaodytic hclp.
The ethicel chellenge of ofr is to reach the highest possible
level ofhonesty with ourselves so gs to be rs clear as we can be
about what mov6 us.Our real eneny is rationdization. We can con
anrselves so easily. But whole-heaned waatirg is thc only sound
basis fior our of. The greater the impactan ect will have, the more
criticd it becomes to know why we are doing it.Beneath our mix of
motives and conditioning facmrs, tlten, we must try todiscover
*'het we really want to ;xrt fortb and to cxprcss for ourselves snd
forothers by our behavior.
But good motivation is not dl that matters. The purest of
notives crnhavc causoophic consnences. So, no matter how noble the
motive, lora,wbat if, and ufut,kc must alsn be takcn inm account.
Ilos can evea tell usmuch about our ti61 . Hou is a mener of style;
it gives xprssion to our trueconvkti
-
8/14/2019 TFC_Gula
8/8
IjO Reann Inlornd By Faitb
. cidcs on our lawns, hrms, golf courses, rnd ofshdPlifting evt!
if it is "nickel-andJimel stuff.
One 6ing is for sure when we begin to explore arbst if' We face
heed-onttre *r* reatity thet r toally Private morel rct is Pure
illusion' "It won'trfiect myone but me" is an inpos.sibility whcl
we teke tlre relationrl dimen-sftn of our lives scrixrsly end the
consequences of our rctions iust rs seri-orlsly. The o6cl jrqueaian
rcfuses m let us escepe the fact that we bdong modrers.
Following closcly behind the oAar fquestion is wht clsc. Wb*
clrc anbedone? Whet are the possible altematives? lf we think we
are forced into aneither/or choicc, we ought to look again. We
generally have more altemativesopeo to us than we think. What
altematives do we have to abonion for theunwantd pregnancy, to oil
as our primary source of eoergy, to driving aloneto work, to
working ovcrtime five days a week, to, telwision as our
primarysource of family entertainmenti The point is that, since
every moral choiceineviubly has some good and some bad outcomes, we
need to explore altema-tives. If there were no altematives, there
would be no moral problems. Toooften we rnake ttre $Tong moral
choice not becruse we are bad people, butbeeuse we are iust too
unimagimtive. We are not able to see the rich poten-tial for good
which lies within us and in our situation- Asking ulat cir keepsus
open and challenges us to be creative and to consult a wide base of
moralwidom and moral vision.
This, then, briedy skerches the reality-revealing questions
which help usto see the reality of our human situation for what it
truly is. But beyondasking these questions, the mature moral
conscience also consults a wide baseof monl wisdon m highlight
values of our human situation which mightotherwise go unnoticed if
we were left on our own. Pan Three of this bookwill discrss sources
of moral wisdom to which we might appeel in making amord iudgmeot.
For the Catholic, tlrc moral teaching of the megisterium has
a special place in the formation of conscience. In the Catholic
view, a properly informed consciencc is ioescapably ecclesial. What
is the relation, then,of personal riroral conscience to the
authoritrtive teaching of the churchl Thisis the focus of our next
chapter.
Nota
l. Visbn ;nd Chrett (Rrmsey: Paulist Press, l98l), p. 1. This
bookoffers a careful criticism of Kohlbeqg as well as a proposal
for an altcmative tomoml education based on a 'visional ethics"
rather than tlre standard "iuridi-cal ethics" promoted by
Kolrlberg.
2. Recent yelrs h:ve shorjyn an incrcasing intereit in charcter
in moral
Th Fonatbn {Conscicncc 15 I
theolo{y. This interst in ethics hrs develoPed ttgtg *le the
lyeasing*:ili'- ".w, or
narrativc, in other ereas of theology'-Stanley Haucrwas
L""Iu.- i -.lit.*t advocate of an "6hics of charecter"' See' for
exalqlg'ili;;;-;k, ibarcw a tte Cbtistian Lifc: A Stdl {.rholqicat
Etbbld" [tonio: trinitv Univcrsity kcss' 1975); elso' his
coucrrons.ol ssrys:
V#ll;-vrt " iNJ* Damcr Fides Puolishcrs, Irrc" l97a); with
Ridtadffil ila liiJa'st na\ f*,t\"t" ^a fr4Sadt (Nor Danrb:
Univtrsity;N; Dit* E*s, tclz)i riso, A Connanitl.o! Cbaractcr--ST*
P"*ilti;il; Notre D.-. fro., l98l); also, 'fh Paeabtc x;ngan
gqotrcil"*Itjl;""*,"t .f Not," Dem" kos , l983li and Strffcting
Prcrczcc (Notreil,oi. ;;;;;;'d ;iNotre Dame Press,
re86)'""'"-;.';;i;,-;'n;fi a,u s,^a'(t't*' York Random House' Inc''
vin-taee Books, l%2)' P. 81.*";Ti't.#;i Cttoi"" itt Morality," in
Ian T' Ram,sev' cd ' cbritiatntm'^a i"rtt-pi-ry Pbilwopby (New
York: The Macmillan Co'' 1966)' p'20n.'""' 5. Coo Etbiq Be
Cbrit'iut''2 (Chicago: University of Chicago hess'1975). D.
69.""1:'S*. for example, Dondd Evans' "Does Religious Faid
Conffict*i rr li"r"J iJ.-l-'ral./. autuotatl, anit Moralitl
(toro*o: Univasityof Tormto hess, 1980)' pp' 197-!tl6'"'
'";;;;V,;i;Ed n'hgi-' rh stuping.of Fltb' vttucs' oi
cdturc(Minncaoolis: Augsburg Publishing House' 1987)' P' 24'
8. 'On media vio[ncc' sec i]id', pp' I I l-158's. For " btief
report
of a study on -the.signifi*::,ot.t:!ut-:- to
"a".u.* *ool education' see Thomas tr't' Minin' "Television rnd
tbc
il.ffi.;eh.il"" Mii.v"' Tk l;airy Ligbt l8 (Fall tesl):
23l+-241'10.
-Gustafson' Csl Ertbs Bc Cbrbtior? p' 65 'i;: il;;;, itt;croa"
(c.'a.'i ci'v: Doubledav & cornpcav'
Inc., 1978), PP. 128-188.
