Questions to the Moralist - Personal Web Server - Boston College

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Dear Fr. Jim, My friend Joe asks me about the Church's teaching of "sea burying," that is, throwing a dead person's ashes into the sea. Is it forbidden? or not suitable but not forbidden? or no problem? What do you think? Fr. Bretzke responds: Many years ago the Church frowned on cremation, considering it to be a counter-sign to belief in the resurrection of the body, but it has dropped this objection quite some time ago. So the key issue was/is cremation, not dispersal of the ashes. While I think most Catholic organizations believe the ashes should be interred (buried) in a cemetery or mausoleum, I do not believe this is a formal requirement. So scattering the ashes at sea is not directly forbidden to the best of my knowledge, but would not be encouraged either. I think the key issue would be catechesis with the family to make sure they understand the larger concept of the resurrection on the last day, and after that has been done I'd let them make their own decisions on how best to treat the remains of the deceased person. Hi Father Jim! Father, in the principle of the primacy of conscience, one has the duty to follow one's conscience. Concomitant to this is the duty of the person to form one's conscience (CCC 1783-1785). My question is: Is it sinful if the person did not properly form or fail to educate one's conscience? Fr. Bretzke responds: The answer to your question depends on whether the failure in conscience formation was due to vincible or invincible ignorance. If "vincible," the answer would be "yes': if "invincible" the answer would be "no." On this point see CCC 1791 and 1793 as I believe these two numbers address your question. I've also discussed this matter in greater length in Ch. 4 of my book, "A Morally Complex World." Hope this helps, Dear Fr. Bretzke, Peace from the Cross of Christ! I was one of your former students in Fundamental Moral. I write to you to beg some assistance from you. I just want to find answers/opinions to the following problems I encountered; 8
a.) Whether or not there is parvity of matter in the ethical evaluation of sexual acts? b.) A 35-year old married man, business executive, who travels alone frequently. When away from his wife for weeks, he often experiences heightening of sexual tension and that he often resorts to masturbation to retrieve the tension. He is bothered of the situation because he learned from the priest in his high school catechism that every deliberate act of masturbation is gravely sinful and when done with full knowledge and consent, it is mortal sin. How do we evaluate and address the moral status of this practice of masturbation described? Sorry for taking away some pieces of your precious time because I know very well that you are always busy attending to your numberless responsibilities in your ministry. Thank you so much for your attention and generosity. More Power! Respectfully Yours, Fr. Bretzke replies Thanks for your e-mail. I can give an "easy" answer to your first question, but it's the second question that is pastorally more important, and due to the intrinsic subjective aspect involved it is quite difficult, if not impossible, to answer that question clearly. So to the first question: yes, the notion of parvity of matter relates to moral evaluation of sexual acts. The notion of parvity (or gravity) of matter relates to every moral act, sexual acts included. Keep in mind that these are relative terms--it's not like mangoes vs. papayas, but points on a spectrum--thus how much is "light" and how much is "heavy"? The older moral tradition used to hold that there was always the presumption of "grave" matter in sexual matters, but the Catechism of the Catholic Church (the Universal Catechism and not the Filipino Catechism) explicitly recognizes that subjective considerations can significantly reduce the "objective" gravity of the matter, reducing, and evening removing moral culpability in many cases. #2352 in the Catechism of the Catholic Church states: the following moral/pastoral principle: "To form an equitable judgment about the subjects' moral responsibility and to guide pastoral action, one must take into account the affective immaturity, force of acquired habit, conditions of anxiety, or other psychological or social factors that lessen or even extenuate moral culpability." Now only God Himself can see into the human heart with perfect clarity so only God can accurately judge this man's situation. No one else can do so with complete accuracy, not even the man himself, much less a confessor, counselor, bishop, pope, etc. 9
Page 1 and 2: Questions to the Moralist These are
Page 3 and 4: Dear Former Student, While post-rap
Page 5 and 6: Lately I have took up the shakuhach
Page 7: (though without the moral significa
Page 11 and 12: of what is done or not done the fet
Page 13 and 14: Dear Fr. Bretzke I just want to ask
Page 15 and 16: My site there might be turned off,
Page 17 and 18: Dear Fr. Bretzke, I teach sophomore
Page 19 and 20: ministries of counseling know far t
Page 21 and 22: Fr. Jim Here are my questions: In a
Page 23 and 24: q: what does it mean when CDF in is
Page 25 and 26: Thanks for the reflection. I'm not
Page 27 and 28: Fr. Bretzke replies: Thanks, and if
Page 29 and 30: that various relationships are not
Page 31 and 32: decision, to go out, and the relati
Page 33 and 34: here are a few questions that I fin
Page 35 and 36: the women that have had an abortion
Page 37 and 38: do not know if it also holds true w
Page 39 and 40: Dear Father; I have this question t
Page 41 and 42: a way of human knowing. However, "i
Page 43 and 44: Fr. Bretzke replies: In short, I co
Page 45 and 46: person to do more evil things. It c
Page 47 and 48: Fr. Jim Fr. Jim, Hello! Good day! T
Page 49 and 50: this reason many moral theologians
Page 51 and 52: sacraments. But we CANNOT say that
Page 53 and 54: the huge statistics on innocent dea
Page 55 and 56: eason Thomas notes that the more we
Page 57 and 58: hastened. yes we can treat pain agg
Page 59 and 60:
Fr. Bretzke replies: Thanks, I hadn
Page 61 and 62:
pastorally speaking, following the
Page 63 and 64:
> The Forum will endeavor to make p
Page 65 and 66:
Why is masturbation a sin? I don't
Page 67 and 68:
positivism," i.e., one must hold as
Page 69 and 70:
I may always be in my lifetime [pas
Page 71 and 72:
not always accurate. On the other h
Page 73 and 74:
Dear Father, Last Sunday in my apos
Page 75:
[forthcoming] Index 75
show all

Questions to the Moralist - Personal Web Server - Boston College

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?