The May 2010 Euthanasia Prevention Coalition Newsletter can now be found at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/Newsletters/Newsletter108(May2010)(RGB).pdf Bill C-384 was soundly defeated by a vote of 228 to 59. Check how the Members of Parliament voted at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/HowTheyVoted.pdf On June 5, 2010, we are co-hosting the US/Canda Push-Back Seminar at the Radisson Gateway Hotel at the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The overwhelming defeat of Bill C-384 proved that we can Push-Back the euthanasia lobby in the US and Canada and convince people that euthanasia and assisted suicide are a dangerous public policy. Register for the Seminar at: http://www.euthanasiaprevention.on.ca/2010SeminarFlyer(RGB)(LetterFormat).pdf The Schindler family are being attacked by a Florida television station and Michael Schiavo. The Euthanasia Prevention Coalition is standing in solidarity with the Schindler family. My blog comments: http://alexschadenberg.blogspot.com/2010/05/att
Reflections from the pastoral ministry of an Evangelical Catholic Priest.
Question on another topic. Fr. Tim. I was having a discussion on another blog and I wondered if I was interpreting a term correctly. In the context of Catholic moral theology is a moral absolute defined as an action committed by a moral agent that is either absolutely right or absolutely wrong independent of the circumstances? One can't use situation ethics or consequentialism to justify it.
ReplyDeleteThe person I was discussing that with viewed moral absolutes more as moral principles ( i.e. do not lie, do not steal, etc.) which very admirable and are principles which one should seek to support are not moral absolutes. A few moments reflection would bring up situations where both can and indeed should be transgressed.
Is that a fair interpretation?
Rationalist: A moral absolute cannot be interpreted due to circumstances meaning that one cannot use situational ethics to contravene it. However the examples you give (lying, stealing) do not qualify as moral absolutes for the reason offer. There are times when both would be moral (lying to save a life in wartime, stealing food for a starving person etc.).
ReplyDeletePerhaps your partner in your discussion is being a touch too severe or strict in his interpretation. I hope he is not a confessor. I sure as hell wouldn't want to go into his confessional if he takes no account of the situation in which a sin occurred.
Fr. Tim
Rationalist: On another subject as well, what the hell has happened to the Holy Post? The articles have been weak and the comments terrible! I know that Charlie is off sick but I find it hard to understand how it could have gone so bad so fast. Are you finding the same thing?
DeleteFr. Tim
No. The blog was http://2catholicmen.blogspot.ca/. He was arguing moral absolutes vs moral relativism as the seemingly only two moral choices.
DeleteI agree Holy Post is lame. I home Mr. Lewis isn't too sick and gets better soon. You need to submit a few articles.