THEO 13 Long Test PDF

Lesson 1.2: Etymology of Vocation THEO 13 - UNIT TEST 1 September 14, 2024 Why the need to know the etymology? To und...

Lesson 1.2: Etymology of Vocation THEO 13 - UNIT TEST 1 September 14, 2024 Why the need to know the etymology? To understand the context of the word and find out if any meanings were lost in translation ---------------------------------------------------- TIMELINE To call 09/14/24 Module 1 to 1.5 To invite VOCARE Module 2.1 to 2.3 (Latin) To designate 09/15/24 Module 2.4 to 2.5 … all with a specific purpose 09/16/24 Flashcards + Reread The call is not the only important thing; it’s also the way we respond to this call. -------------------------------------------- MODULE 1 - Lecture Naming in the old times is sacred; it’s a form of designation. Lesson 1.1: Theological Framework OT Motifs HUMAN VOCATION Call to exist All of us Christians are to find fulfillment as Call to be co-creators and partners in human beings ownership “To be a full person” Call to covenant (i.e. Sinai Covenant) CHRISTIAN VOCATION To find fulfillment as Christians, living out our Contract Covenant baptism and its summons to be holy Transactional Relationship (communion and cooperation with God), to be active members in the community, and to Has terms, depending Only 10 Terms: the 10 bear witness to the Kingdom (communion on what one party Commandments and cooperation with others) requires “To be a full Christian” God would send prophets to remind the Israelites SPECIFIC CHRISTIAN VOCATION about the covenant. To discover concrete vocation (lay person, consecrated religious person) that will But Jesus is different from these prophets in nature, enable us to make our specific contribution He is the definitive prophet to the construction of the Kingdom He continued the mission of the prophets Evangelizing in a full and organic way (calling humankind back to God) but in a “To fully contribute as a person and a wider/comprehensive, definitive way Christian) He is now the main character – God is clearer in the Person of Christ → Kingdom of God is a condition/state  ○ Compared to the OT, where In Christus Vivit, vocation is understood in 2 senses: prophets weren’t necessarily Broad sense ‘embodying’ God Strict sense NT Motifs (and terms) BROAD SENSE Call to life, friendship with Him, holiness Kalein To call (Greek) Contains OT Call to integral human development nuance – but is now renegotiated STRICT SENSE Call to missionary service to others Call to love kalon The one who invites a response Call to do work and use our abilities → for AKA Jesus society and common good kalloumenoi Those who FORMS OF VOCATION accepted the call marriage and family life kleisis Calling single blessedness Given during special consecration baptism work ekklesia The Church Gaudete et Exsultate (Rejoice and be glad!) (2018) → Apostolic Exhortation on the Call to Holiness in The Christian Vocation: A Call - Response Model Today’s World Active, personal response to a general call More dialogical – actively seeking how we Everyone is called to holiness can respond/participate All the faithful, whatever their condition or More communitarian and egalitarian state, are called by the Lord, each in his own ○ Egalitarian means equal; no way (Lumen Gentium) prioritization for those who serve religiously (e.g. priest) Holy ○ Clericalism is a problem; it’s wrong to JUSTUS (root word) think that priests are superior or that = righteousness Justice we cannot question their words or authority More dynamic – you are not forced to Righteousness, meaning makatwiran or makatao respond in the same way as others Reinforced in the call to covenant (10 commandments) “VOCATION IS SPECIFIC, BUT NOT SPECIAL!” “Do not be afraid of being holy.” Lesson 1.3 Vocation according to Pope Francis 3 DEFINITIONS OF HOLINESS → The Universal Call to Holiness Holiness is… Christus Vivit (Christ is Alive!) (2019) 1. Living our lives with love by bearing witness → Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation on Young in all we do, no matter where we are People, Faith, and Vocational Discernment 2. A process of many small gestures and a perfection of what we’ve already started doing  3. Charity (the love of others) lived to the full Development is not only about economic growth Work forms who we are (our identity) Development has to be well rounded – It’s wrong to think “trabaho lang, walang fostering the development of each man and personalan” of the whole man Lesson 1.4 A Theology of Work MODULE 2 - Lecture Lesson 2.1: Morality and Religion Christus Vivit on Work Work is a necessity, part of the meaning of ITC Reading - We don’t need religion to be good life on this earth, a path to growth, human because we are fundamentally moral beings. development and personal fulfillment Work is an expression of human dignity, a MORAL RELATIVISM/SKEPTICISM path of development of social inclusion Do not believe in an order of morality It is a constant stimulus to grow in responsibility and creativity People used to believe that religion is a necessity to It is an opportunity to give glory to God by be morally good, but ITC (International Theological developing one’s abilities Commission) denies this. Pope Francis: ○ Sometimes you have to accept Astorga: “Religion adds something to our morality whatever work is available picture” ○ But never give up on your dreams, never bury a calling WHAT RELIGION OFFERS TO MORALITY ○ Keep seeking at least partial ways Openness to live what you have discerned to be Transforms our view of our calling; from your real calling human vocation to christian vocation ○ “I’m not doing this just for myself, but CST (Catholic Social Teaching) on Work also for the call that a transcendent CST places great value on work being gave me.” Laborem Exercens - Encyclical Letter on Shows depth, intensity, and urgency of Human Work on the 90th Anniversary of morality Rerum Novarum (JP2) (1981) ○ Work is one of our clearest 2 TYPES OF MORALS expressions of being co-creators with God ○ Work is indispensable and necessary OBJECTIVE right ○ Work is for the human person, not MORALS actions wrong human person for work SUBJECTIVE good Lesson 1.5 A Call to IHD MORALS person/actor moral IHD - Integral Human Development Populorum Progressio - Encyclical Letter on the Lesson 2.2 Natural Law as a Source of Moral Development of Peoples (1967) (Paul VI) Norms Various Sources of Moral Norms in the CMT → knowable without God Scripture → natural != imposed but natural = given MEANING it Tradition is not from an exterior source but rather our nature Natural Law as humans Human Experience Magisterium CHRISTIAN ADAPTATION OF NL 2 PREMISES OF NATURAL LAW By Thomas Aquinas; inspired from Aristotle Natural Law is seen as a participation in ONTOLOGICAL Looks at the God’s Law — but NOT divinely imposed essence of things NL is aligned to human good and flourishing We find an order → a rational direction of life to things that HUMAN FINITUDE – so we need divine point to basic rules revelation to guide us that guide us on ○ But this is not a necessity of faith what is right or wrong ○ We don’t need faith to understand E.G. Unjust harm is things wrong, but just harm may be 3 BASIC HUMAN INCLINATIONS (Aquinas) alright (self-defense) Self-preservation EPISTEMOLOGICAL Based on the Goods shared with animals realm of reason and knowledge Goods that our proper to our own nature INSERT SIGNIFICANCE OF NL Supports moral realism (vs. moral relativism) Lesson 2.2 Natural Law ○ Moral relativism - there are no regulations, everything is justified NL → “Human reason reflecting on human ○ Moral realism - there is an order to experience discovering moral value” right or wrong Springboard for dialogue with other cultures, NATURAL LAW religious beliefs, and people Originated from Greek stoics ○ In a pluralist society, we must appeal Not religious in nature; non-Christian in origin to NL Thomistic NL tradition Recognizes complexity of moral life Various NL traditions What I ought to do? → what is natural? Clarification and Nuances Basic human inclinations aligned to survival 2 Possible Approaches and flourishing ○ Pluralist ○ Self-preservation ○ Universalist ○ Reproduction ○ Sociability Pluralist Recognizes that there are ○ Knowledge/Education cultural variations Universalist There is a single, universal When we say natural… standard across all cultures → does not require supernatural revelation  From there, we can derive threats specific norms ○ Misinformation involved Challenge: The delicate balancing act In pursuit of eudaimonia (happiness) in the TWO COMPONENTS OF A HUMAN ACT context of a teleological (telos, meaning Sufficient freedom goal) of the human person Sufficient knowledge This is done by using prudence AS A RESULT: 2 paradigms are in tension On Freedom -------------------------------------- (specific vs. general norms) Power, capacity, to do actions deliberately ○ This tension is not necessarily bad, as Two levels: freedom from and freedom for long as the balancing act is done properly Freedom From ○ This balancing act must be radically → bare minimum oriented towards God → understands freedom in a negative sense → “What can we do to not get in trouble?” → whimsical and superficial, not using the freedom Lesson 2.3 The Moral Evaluation of an Action for the good On subjective morality: Human Acts and Acts of the Freedom For Human Person → deeper and more significant HA vs. AHP → understands freedom in a positive sense → “How do we use our freedom to do good?” Human Act Performed with sufficient → necessary for us to accomplish HV and CV freedom and knowledge Personal acts Fundamental Option Theory Level of Freedom of choice vs. Freedom of control/ownership of self-determination action When we were born, we are naturally and Moral responsibility and culpability on sinfulness radically oriented towards God “The human moral ○ This is our basic stance or response (HA) will entail fundamental option freedom and knowledge ○ “Our life is a journey back to the on the part of the moral Creator” agent” Acts of the Were committed without What this means… Human Person sufficient knowledge and The basic stance – we have the power to freedom affirm or reject it Impersonal acts ○ Can happen in two levels: freedom of An act brought about by choice – done in the small choices, a human person freedom of self-determination – Diminished or removed moral responsibility and done in big decisions which have culpability significant impact Spontaneous biological Some judge a person based on 1 processes, forced wrongdoing actions ○ The theory says this is not true ○ Undue force,  ○ That wrongdoing may just affect the A knowledge that values something and freedom of choice – which doesn’t creates judgments about it affect the basic stance ○ What we must look out for is the SUMMARY wrongdoings done in the freedom of Sufficient freedom + knowledge = HUMAN self-determination ACT Take note that there’s a ○ Don’t judge the act too quickly; look problem with this approach at components Inadequate exercise of freedom and THE PROBLEM knowledge (through factors that truly and The freedom of choice acts can snowball severely compromise either) may diminish or into something bigger that eventually remove moral responsibility becomes an act that involves freedom of ○ Be careful of our tendency to self-determination self-rationalize (e.g. making excuses) Caveat vs. Tendency to self-rationalize and Repeated Acts → habits → character → personality be blinded Lies → constantly lying → a dishonest person ○ Know the difference between exceptions or when you’re We must practice the freedom of self-determination self-rationalizing also in our small choices ○ The more we make excuses → the Has to be reflected in our freedom of choice more you know you have the ADEQUATE components On Knowledge ------------------------------------ Moral != legal responsibility Awareness of right/wrongness of an action ○ The sleepy driver didn’t commit a sin, to be done and brings this to action but he will face legal consequences Two types: conceptual knowledge and A free response in the moral life is rarely a evaluative knowledge simple process It is important to examine not only how we Conceptual Knowledge think but also how we choose, what we Head knowledge long for, how emotions affect our “I know it but I don’t necessarily care or responding to our vocation to be a full understand it” Christian This is enough to know if there was a ○ An interplay of feeling, thinking, and human act involved willing But in the context of moral living and fulfilling our HV and CV, this is not enough – we need Lesson 2.4 Sin (The Failure to Bother to Love) evaluative knowledge Evaluative Knowledge We need to see the distinction between Heart knowledge mortal/grave and venial sins. We always think that “I know it’s wrong to kill so I will not do it, not sin = wrongdoings because I fear the law, but because I know the values behind it” Mortal Serious enough to turn us away Can also be in the form of → “I know it’s from God, our ultimate end, and wrong to steal medicine, but I’ll do it for the ruptures our relationship with Him greater good” When we use our freedom of  ○ Has something to do with a personal, self-determination AWAY from God (recall radical orientation) binding relationship with Him ○ Sin is modeled after a family 3 CONDITIONS FOR A SIN TO BE relationship that has been ruptured MORTAL ○ Sin > Legal Offense 1. Evaluative knowledge is ○ Sin = Relationship w/ God & neighbor engaged Wrongdoing is just the minimum → sin is 2. Freedom for 3. Grave object about breaking a relationship a. Actions that radically contradict James Keenan offers a different perspective: human good or Sin as the failure to bother to love survival → to fail to strive out of love is sin b. Murder, stealing, If I try to be loving but fail – that’s not sin slavery Sin is … Venial “Sins we are desensitized to”, a ○ when we fail to become better “gradual” rupture → not dramatic ○ When we become complacent like mortal sin When we equate goodness with just simply avoiding evil, we fail to give a FULL response “Venia” - easily excusable or to the one who calls forgettable Weakens our fundamental Why do we fail to bother to love? Why do we option/basic stance (not overlook sinning? necessarily turning away from him Overly simplistic view of sin immediately) Sin dulls us, lulls us ○ We sin in the comfortable Still not to be underestimated We have trivialized sinfulness ○ Itemized list Why is the Church insistent on the distinction We don’t look at the depths of our faults between the two? ○ Rich man example Because people need to be trained to recognize sins for the sacrament of → You can think of sins as symptoms/indicators confession → We have to treat the disease, not just the Because priests would have to administer symptom confession and give penance AS A RESULT: sin = wrongdoings Therefore… Sin occurs where we are strong ETYMOLOGY OF SIN The strong one usually doesn’t bother – and “Sunder” (German) – to break from another that is wrong Intentional breaking, refer to “asunder” We sin out of strength, not out of weakness Hebrew words used in SS ○ Hatta - missing the mark GOODNESS RIGHTNESS ○ Awon - deviating off track ○ Pesha - breaking of a covenant; THE PERSON THE ACTION revolt Is the person striving to A behavior that Common denominators of these words: be loving? What is the promotes value in the ○ Sin is a free and knowing choice of person’s intention? Are world. you doing good out of evil  It is a sanctuary selfish convenience? It asks whether our actions make the world ○ It is inviolable; no one can enter that A person acting out of a better place. place without your permission love strives to live ○ Personal encounter with God and a rightly. response to what one believes to be God’s voice and command → which It asks whether we we experience when we face moral strive to answer Jesus’ call to love God and problems neighbor. 4 SENSES/MOMENTS OF THE CONSCIENCE Goodness doesn’t guarantee rightness. Conscience 1 - Synderesis Wrongness doesn’t guarantee badness. Conscience 2 - Discernment → A bad person is driven to sin through right or wrong choices. Conscience 3 - Judgment → But, one who acts wrongly, even if he/she is trying Conscience 4 - Self-evaluation to be loving, is still accountable. Conscience 1 Instead of… Synderesis (vs. syneidesis) What have I done wrong? ○ Synderesis - spark of conscience; Thinking how to be excused from basic capacity to know/desire the wrongdoing good ○ Syneidesis - self-reflection Maybe we should… General sense of value, fundamental sense “Am I striving to become a better person to of responsibility make the world a better place?” Am I striving to serve the Lord? Conscience 2 Do what is right Discernment Determining the particular good to apply or Lesson 2.5 Conscience evil to be avoided in the current situation/moral problem From Gaudium et Spes, there are 2 levels of Applying universal norms then applying to Conscience specific cases General/Universal (human vocation) This is why we sometimes find exceptions to - “Man detects a law he does not moral rules in different situations impose upon himself, but holds him to obedience” Conscience 3 - Natural Law Judgment - Moral sense Specific judgment of good which “I must do” in this particular situation Specific Christian-level (Christian vocation) Links back to the concept of conscience as a - God’s voice sanctuary – it is inviolable - Relationality (we hear God’s voice ○ This is what I believe I must do through others), communion ○ This is between me and God Conscience 3 is also a SANCTUARY What is conscience? ○ There is an obligation to follow  Gaudium et Spes says to Formation of Conscience follow that inner voice even if One is morally obliged to form one’s it’s contrary to what your faith conscience says The obligation to follow conscience Why? Because from the very presupposes that conscience has been start, you are seeking the properly formed good (assumption) Forming it properly is important → when you ○ Personal accountability before God have to decide quick in future situations, you Not so much about the choice but more know exactly what to do about being this or that kind of person Formation is made for oneself but not by through one’s choice oneself alone Conscience 4 On conscience’s relationality… Self-evaluation Praises/blames what one has already done Relational, communion → community → Must be done in the spirit of integrity and religion/church desire to learn from moral experience Sometimes, self evaluation happens It’s not about being blindly obedient to your immediately or for a long time or sadly at community, but being evaluative of it that forms the last hour – not nice because we need your conscience. time to self-improve Primacy of Conscience 3 (Judgment) Dignitatis Humanae - “That he is not forced to act in a manner contrary to his conscience” - Even if it means not following your religious beliefs - Aquinas: “It is better to die in excommunication than to go against one’s conscience” - Cardinal Ratzinger (prefect of CDF): “Which must be obeyed before all else, necessary even against the requirements of ecclesiastical authority” Different Kinds of Conscience Certain — Doubtful Correct — Erroneous → The connection between self-evaluation and Scrupulous — Lax synderesis is important because it will equip you for future situations – it will improve your synderesis These differences are based on the process and Synderesis is our… decisions made. Habitual and legislative conscience ○ Writes laws  Lax is the worse one because scrupulous still has that element of fear in doing wrong. On erroneous conscience “The good I’m called to do is objectively wrong” But is it wrong if: “The good I’m called to do is objectively wrong in the eyes of the church” It can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be done or already committed Certain and Doubtful ------------------------------ We can look at… Certain Errors due to Vincible Ignorance Confident and certain about one’s decision ○ Can often be imputed to personal There’s an obligatory force to act responsibility But if the conscience is objectively wrong ○ When we take little trouble to find (despite being certain) → then it is a CERTAIN what is true and good and when AND ERRONEOUS conscience conscience is almost blinded by habitual sin Doubtful ○ One is morally responsible for the evil Someone who is truly confused about what commits to do Errors due to Invincible Ignorance There’s no obligatory force for you to act – ○ The moral agent is not culpable but what’s obligatory is to withdraw from acting the acts remain to be wrong and discern well or ask help from others ○ This is because your conscience is not For Pope John Paul II, the sincerity of our heart is properly formed yet more important than the act committed. If you have to act right away – refer to Church teachings A morally mature conscience Develops the whole person Scrupulous and Lax ------------------------------- Possesses and integrates adequate moral These two fail to bother to love. insights about good and evil, theories, norms, Scrupulous and etc. Afraid of making a mistake Possesses and integrates moral passions and Always following Church teachings, even if moral skills the situation calls you to disobey it for that In short: moment ○ Critical, not blindly obedient Wants the SAFE WAY out ○ Is future-oriented Lax Some additional comments: Looks at the convenient solution Keenan: God judges us on the basis not of Wants the EASY WAY out our judgment being objectively wrong or right but on the sincerity of our hearts in BEST: Certain + Correct seeking right judgment and our WORST: Erroneous + Certain + Lax determination to do as we judge  We have an obligation to follow our properly formed conscience and to also respect the conscience of others ○ The obligation of others does not override our own ○ If a friend wants to harm others, we CAN and we MUST tell him to not do it