There are many crises in the Catholic Church today, but one of the most serious is the dismal state of moral theology. That crisis has its roots in the confusion and intellectual ferment that ensued in the aftermath of Vatican II. Progressive moral theologians proposed questionable moral theories like proportionalism and the “fundamental option,” while prominent scholars like Bernard Häring dissented on vital issues of received moral teaching such as the inadmissibility of contraception and the indissolubility of marriage.
These dissident theologians had differing visions, but one common theme: the Church had no authority to proclaim specific, exceptionless moral norms based on natural law. The best it could do was to teach formal moral principles. Specific moral precepts such as “adultery is always wrong” are highly problematic, in their view, because there may be valid exceptions. A corollary is the autonomy of conscience along with “discernment” in making moral decisions. In place of natural law, they recommended more flexible theories that allow for moral compromise in some situations.
John Paul II sought to correct these errors in his encyclical Veritatis splendor. The fundamental option, proportionalism, the sovereignty of conscience, and moral subjectivism – all the heterodox doctrines – were thoroughly refuted through principled reasoning. He also reaffirmed the Church’s commitment to natural law and its anthropological premise of a common and fixed human nature that is a bridge to that law. Intrinsic goods such as life and health, marriage and friendship, constitute our human flourishing. A set of moral norms flows from the first precepts of the natural law and prohibits intrinsic evils such as adultery or the taking of innocent life.
Continue reading at The Catholic Thing