The following paper was presented at the end of the course Living the Moral Life
The first part of the paper deals with our christian moral perspective (plus normativity and conscience) in which we tried to solve the case study; and that is the second part.
Send your comments; don't be shy.
Introduction
No one begins from zero. Whatever one knows, they know from experience whether individual, through others’, or communities’ or culture. Our conceptual knowledge comes from a reflection on data from experience. Thus philosophical or theological ethics are no exception. The good is universally accepted as the goal of morality but its understanding and its means are differently formulated from a culture to another or from an individual to another. Take polygamy for example, while it is good in Muslim and traditional loops of Nigeria, it is regarded as bad by westerners and Christians. Just as there is a Muslim ethics, a Buddhist ethics, likewise there is a Christian ethics with its specific sources, its understanding of the Good and its means. These Christian sources, which include faith and reason –or Revelation, Magisterium, human experience and critical thinking, try to answer to the following question: what kind of actions do I have to perform as a follower of Jesus Christ? In our analysis, we will explore three aspects to moral decision-making, followed with a description, and analysis, of possible resolutions to the many dimensions to the case. First, we will define Moral Vision including the Christian understanding of the Good, the human person as the criterion of any morality, and the means to achieve the Good or the formation of the character. Second we will look at Normativity and its relationship with the various ethical methods. Finally we will look at Conscience and its relationship to this case.
Moral Vision
What is Christian ethics? What are its majors concerns? How does Christian faith influences the understanding of morality? These are some of the questions that this section on a general analysis of Christian moral vision attempts to explore. This analysis will give first the Christian understanding of the Good as the goal of moral life. Secondly, the Christian understanding of the human person as the criterion and agent of morality will be described. Finally, this section will look at the formation of the character as the means of achieving the Good.
God: the Ultimate Good
“So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.”[1]
According to Aristotle, the is good happiness; for the hedonists, the good is whatever is pleasant; for the stoics, being good is being courageous, etc. but for Christians, God is the good. God is the font of all goodness, said Saint Bonaventure. All creatures, visible or invisible, are reflection of the absolute goodness, perfection and holiness of God, or they all participate to God’s goodness. God is the only center of value. It is Jesus encountered through the Scriptures who reveals God’s goodness and perfection. It is through faith in Jesus that one claims to believe that God is the only and ultimate reason for being moral. “The Christian is moral because God is good, and because the goodness of God, always and everywhere present to us, enables and requires us to be responsible for the goodness of the world.”[2] The moral life has to do with who God is for us, and how we have to respond to his call. The moral life integrated into faith, becomes a response to God. The Christian is the one responding to questions such as: what does God desire from me? Who does God call me to be and what is he allowing me to do and be? We, Christians and through Jesus, experience God as primarily love, as our Father who loves us, and whose living presence or grace is given to us and allows us, His children, to be like Him. Thus, the moral life is a love discerning God’s grace in the world and responding to it. Accordingly, sin is more about hurting God’s love for us than breaking a law, or a command. Therefore, faith in God is for me the scope that defines the value of all creatures, the scale through which the wrongness or rightness of an act is evaluated. Consequently, Christian moral life appears as a critical thinking informed by faith in the God of Jesus.
Also, we know God by observing God acting. Human morality has to be governed by what we may know about God’s goodness in action. Among many attributes of God, we know Him as the Creator and the end of all creation. God is the alpha and the omega of all being; all creatures are part of Him and dependent on Him. As God’s stewards, we are co-responsible of the well being of the whole creation. All creatures are good, but none should be made absolute at the detriment of God. Besides, God gives direction to our lives since our ultimate purpose is to love Him and enjoy fully His goodness. Consequently, my conscience becomes the internalized voice of the One to whom I have vowed my loyalty and freedom.
Moreover, God is beneficent, “self-diffusive” goodness. He cares for His creatures and freely gives them His love and grace. In return, the moral life becomes a thanksgiving to all God’s gifts that He endowed us. Just like God is concerned for the well being of the whole creation, so should we be.
All in all, for Christian ethics, the God experience through faith in Jesus Christ is the Good, the unique center of value. We cannot do and pursue the good, unless we are intimately related to God. He enables and requires from the human beings love and gratitude, as the basics virtues of moral life. Since the human beings are the moral agent, it is time to look at the Christian understanding of humanity.
“So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.”[1]
According to Aristotle, the is good happiness; for the hedonists, the good is whatever is pleasant; for the stoics, being good is being courageous, etc. but for Christians, God is the good. God is the font of all goodness, said Saint Bonaventure. All creatures, visible or invisible, are reflection of the absolute goodness, perfection and holiness of God, or they all participate to God’s goodness. God is the only center of value. It is Jesus encountered through the Scriptures who reveals God’s goodness and perfection. It is through faith in Jesus that one claims to believe that God is the only and ultimate reason for being moral. “The Christian is moral because God is good, and because the goodness of God, always and everywhere present to us, enables and requires us to be responsible for the goodness of the world.”[2] The moral life has to do with who God is for us, and how we have to respond to his call. The moral life integrated into faith, becomes a response to God. The Christian is the one responding to questions such as: what does God desire from me? Who does God call me to be and what is he allowing me to do and be? We, Christians and through Jesus, experience God as primarily love, as our Father who loves us, and whose living presence or grace is given to us and allows us, His children, to be like Him. Thus, the moral life is a love discerning God’s grace in the world and responding to it. Accordingly, sin is more about hurting God’s love for us than breaking a law, or a command. Therefore, faith in God is for me the scope that defines the value of all creatures, the scale through which the wrongness or rightness of an act is evaluated. Consequently, Christian moral life appears as a critical thinking informed by faith in the God of Jesus.
Also, we know God by observing God acting. Human morality has to be governed by what we may know about God’s goodness in action. Among many attributes of God, we know Him as the Creator and the end of all creation. God is the alpha and the omega of all being; all creatures are part of Him and dependent on Him. As God’s stewards, we are co-responsible of the well being of the whole creation. All creatures are good, but none should be made absolute at the detriment of God. Besides, God gives direction to our lives since our ultimate purpose is to love Him and enjoy fully His goodness. Consequently, my conscience becomes the internalized voice of the One to whom I have vowed my loyalty and freedom.
Moreover, God is beneficent, “self-diffusive” goodness. He cares for His creatures and freely gives them His love and grace. In return, the moral life becomes a thanksgiving to all God’s gifts that He endowed us. Just like God is concerned for the well being of the whole creation, so should we be.
All in all, for Christian ethics, the God experience through faith in Jesus Christ is the Good, the unique center of value. We cannot do and pursue the good, unless we are intimately related to God. He enables and requires from the human beings love and gratitude, as the basics virtues of moral life. Since the human beings are the moral agent, it is time to look at the Christian understanding of humanity.
The Human Person Adequately Considered
“Let us make [hu]man in our image, after our likeness… God created [hu]man in his image; in the divine image he created him [them]; male and female he created.”[3]
Morality starts with the human person. Respecting the human person is respecting the Creator incarnated in the humanity of Jesus. According to Gula[4], the understanding the moral agent has shifted from the human nature to the human person. An action was right when it respected the natural purpose of each human faculty, according to the structure and function of the body. The new morality from Vatican II, instead, is concerned about the person him/her self. It establishes that the human person, image of God, adequately and integrally considered is the criterion of the morality of an act.[5] What does this mean? First, the human person is image of God. It is the relationship with God that defines the humanity. Divine faithfulness and love sustain human dignity, not human achievements. “The biblical truth about human person is that being image of God is irreversible.”[6] Through free choice or decision, one can lose divine likeness; but no one, under any circumstances and for any reasons, can lose his/her dignity as image of God. All human beings share in the common human condition or the orientation towards the ultimate goal, God. Also, the Christian faith into God as Trinity makes a big difference in the understanding of the human person. For Gula, Trinity “means that God is eternally the giver or lover (Father), the receiver or beloved (Son) and the gift or love which binds them together (Spirit). When God expresses divine love outside of the Trinity, nature comes into being, with the human person being the point at which nature reaches self-consciousness.”[7]
Therefore, the human person is where nature responds to God by offering itself. God-Trinity can creates only a relational, and communitarian being, like Him. The human person is one redeemed by Jesus.
Second, then, the human person is a relational being, communal at its core, essentially and existentially directed towards others. Into interdependent, human persons are mutually responsible of each other. True freedom is the one that leads one to give him/her self up to/for others, just like God does. The more one is involved into the well-being of the human community, the more the humanity of each person is enhanced, and vice-versa. Also, the human person lives into social groups made of political, economical, cultural…structures that guarantee human dignity and the common good. Therefore, issues such as global solidarity and development, promotion of peace and disarmament, stewardship of God's creation, economic justice, role of government and subsidiary, rights and duties of citizens, option for the poor and many others that concerned common good and human dignity are strongly addressed by the Christian social ethics.
Third, the human person is an embodied subject. The human person makes use of autonomy, self-determination, conscience, freedom and knowledge for a moral discernment. The human person is not an object of exploitation. Human body is essential to being integrated person, image of God, to being human and living human life. The body expresses our interiority. We are called to respect it according to the laws of biology, to develop our potentials and to accept our limitations.
Fourth, the human person is an historical subject, located in time and space. The cultural context in which one lives provides an understanding of values. Human beings integrate their past into the present in order to anticipate the future. And everyone is called to progress and develop.
Finally, “the human person adequately considered” is fundamentally equal but uniquely though equal in our human condition and human nature, each human being is unique and original in their genetic endowment, unconscious motives, social-cultural context, beliefs, worldview, dispositions and affections, intentions, and imagination.
Thus, Christian morality is personalistic as it considers “the human person adequately considered” as the criterion of morality. The human person needs to be informed and educated so that one may grasp this understanding of the human person in his/her quest of the good. This is the aim of the point that follows.
“Let us make [hu]man in our image, after our likeness… God created [hu]man in his image; in the divine image he created him [them]; male and female he created.”[3]
Morality starts with the human person. Respecting the human person is respecting the Creator incarnated in the humanity of Jesus. According to Gula[4], the understanding the moral agent has shifted from the human nature to the human person. An action was right when it respected the natural purpose of each human faculty, according to the structure and function of the body. The new morality from Vatican II, instead, is concerned about the person him/her self. It establishes that the human person, image of God, adequately and integrally considered is the criterion of the morality of an act.[5] What does this mean? First, the human person is image of God. It is the relationship with God that defines the humanity. Divine faithfulness and love sustain human dignity, not human achievements. “The biblical truth about human person is that being image of God is irreversible.”[6] Through free choice or decision, one can lose divine likeness; but no one, under any circumstances and for any reasons, can lose his/her dignity as image of God. All human beings share in the common human condition or the orientation towards the ultimate goal, God. Also, the Christian faith into God as Trinity makes a big difference in the understanding of the human person. For Gula, Trinity “means that God is eternally the giver or lover (Father), the receiver or beloved (Son) and the gift or love which binds them together (Spirit). When God expresses divine love outside of the Trinity, nature comes into being, with the human person being the point at which nature reaches self-consciousness.”[7]
Therefore, the human person is where nature responds to God by offering itself. God-Trinity can creates only a relational, and communitarian being, like Him. The human person is one redeemed by Jesus.
Second, then, the human person is a relational being, communal at its core, essentially and existentially directed towards others. Into interdependent, human persons are mutually responsible of each other. True freedom is the one that leads one to give him/her self up to/for others, just like God does. The more one is involved into the well-being of the human community, the more the humanity of each person is enhanced, and vice-versa. Also, the human person lives into social groups made of political, economical, cultural…structures that guarantee human dignity and the common good. Therefore, issues such as global solidarity and development, promotion of peace and disarmament, stewardship of God's creation, economic justice, role of government and subsidiary, rights and duties of citizens, option for the poor and many others that concerned common good and human dignity are strongly addressed by the Christian social ethics.
Third, the human person is an embodied subject. The human person makes use of autonomy, self-determination, conscience, freedom and knowledge for a moral discernment. The human person is not an object of exploitation. Human body is essential to being integrated person, image of God, to being human and living human life. The body expresses our interiority. We are called to respect it according to the laws of biology, to develop our potentials and to accept our limitations.
Fourth, the human person is an historical subject, located in time and space. The cultural context in which one lives provides an understanding of values. Human beings integrate their past into the present in order to anticipate the future. And everyone is called to progress and develop.
Finally, “the human person adequately considered” is fundamentally equal but uniquely though equal in our human condition and human nature, each human being is unique and original in their genetic endowment, unconscious motives, social-cultural context, beliefs, worldview, dispositions and affections, intentions, and imagination.
Thus, Christian morality is personalistic as it considers “the human person adequately considered” as the criterion of morality. The human person needs to be informed and educated so that one may grasp this understanding of the human person in his/her quest of the good. This is the aim of the point that follows.
Formation of the Character
For Christian ethics, the moral agent is primary on the behavior. The first concern of Christian ethics is the human person who engages her/himself in free choices and moral actions. The emphasis is not primary on decisions and actions. Christian ethics tries to move from the question ‘what ought I to do?’ to the question ‘what ought I to be?’ Morality is thus a response to God, the ultimate good, according to what God makes possible and calls for in me. The Christian asks then the following question: who do you want me to be, Father? This reflection leads then to the formation of moral character, as what one ought to be before the Lord. The formation of the moral character includes also aspects such as fundamental option, sin and virtue, and conscience. While the latter will be developed in another chapter, let us look at the other three aspects.
A human person is not just acted upon, agent, able of self-agency and self-determination. As Gula says, “If someone dumps a load of lemons on your porch, don’t complain. Make lemonade”[8]. One is what she/he chooses to be. Self-transcendence is a human characteristic. When one chooses to direct his/her life by certain beliefs and values, all his/her action will be conform to the at previous choice. These choices have to be free and responsible. This freedom of choice is part of the basic freedom that requires the involvement of our whole being. Basic freedom is deciding about our identity and who we want to be; namely, basic freedom is about the fundamental direction or stance of our lives in accordance with our personal identity.
Through baptism, one applies her/his basic freedom in professing faith in God and commitment in the promotion of love and life. One accepts therefore her/his identity of child of God. The fundamental stance that flows then is the discipleship. The identity of the Christian as child of God and his/her fundamental stance as disciple of Jesus are the context in which his/her actions will be evaluated. They are highlighted “through committing oneself to a way of life that is stable enough to sustain a perduring quality of life...”[9] the fundamental option becomes then a free choice rooted in our identity as children of God and manifests our basic freedom of self-agency to decide how one wants to live his/her fundamental stance. Understood in this context, then, sin is any attempt to break the fundamental stance in which all human beings are called to be children of God. Sin is more about breaking a relationship with God and others than about breaking a law. While venial sin touches simple everyday choices, mortal sin hurts our coral identity, our fundamental orientation towards God. Social sins are all those structures that prevent human persons to be fully human and to live free.
As a result, Christian morality conceives freedom as engaged not much in selecting between two objects, but rather in who a person wants to be, in our being disciples. This freedom needs, therefore, to be supported by certain knowledge. It is not sufficient to know by head what morality requires; one needs to know in the heart. Moral knowledge should push one to decide and act in a genuine way that articulates his/her moral freedom. Freedom and knowledge help us choose and acquire virtues or the habitus of the disciples. Virtues are basic values that have become part of our being, values that have become our routine, our inclination. A virtuous person is one acting naturally through values acquired by everyday training, by a lifelong metanoia. Christian morality aims to form a Christian character, namely a disciple of Christ. The real disciple is the saint. In other words, the goal of Christian morality is holiness, which is fully found in God alone.
For Christian ethics, the moral agent is primary on the behavior. The first concern of Christian ethics is the human person who engages her/himself in free choices and moral actions. The emphasis is not primary on decisions and actions. Christian ethics tries to move from the question ‘what ought I to do?’ to the question ‘what ought I to be?’ Morality is thus a response to God, the ultimate good, according to what God makes possible and calls for in me. The Christian asks then the following question: who do you want me to be, Father? This reflection leads then to the formation of moral character, as what one ought to be before the Lord. The formation of the moral character includes also aspects such as fundamental option, sin and virtue, and conscience. While the latter will be developed in another chapter, let us look at the other three aspects.
A human person is not just acted upon, agent, able of self-agency and self-determination. As Gula says, “If someone dumps a load of lemons on your porch, don’t complain. Make lemonade”[8]. One is what she/he chooses to be. Self-transcendence is a human characteristic. When one chooses to direct his/her life by certain beliefs and values, all his/her action will be conform to the at previous choice. These choices have to be free and responsible. This freedom of choice is part of the basic freedom that requires the involvement of our whole being. Basic freedom is deciding about our identity and who we want to be; namely, basic freedom is about the fundamental direction or stance of our lives in accordance with our personal identity.
Through baptism, one applies her/his basic freedom in professing faith in God and commitment in the promotion of love and life. One accepts therefore her/his identity of child of God. The fundamental stance that flows then is the discipleship. The identity of the Christian as child of God and his/her fundamental stance as disciple of Jesus are the context in which his/her actions will be evaluated. They are highlighted “through committing oneself to a way of life that is stable enough to sustain a perduring quality of life...”[9] the fundamental option becomes then a free choice rooted in our identity as children of God and manifests our basic freedom of self-agency to decide how one wants to live his/her fundamental stance. Understood in this context, then, sin is any attempt to break the fundamental stance in which all human beings are called to be children of God. Sin is more about breaking a relationship with God and others than about breaking a law. While venial sin touches simple everyday choices, mortal sin hurts our coral identity, our fundamental orientation towards God. Social sins are all those structures that prevent human persons to be fully human and to live free.
As a result, Christian morality conceives freedom as engaged not much in selecting between two objects, but rather in who a person wants to be, in our being disciples. This freedom needs, therefore, to be supported by certain knowledge. It is not sufficient to know by head what morality requires; one needs to know in the heart. Moral knowledge should push one to decide and act in a genuine way that articulates his/her moral freedom. Freedom and knowledge help us choose and acquire virtues or the habitus of the disciples. Virtues are basic values that have become part of our being, values that have become our routine, our inclination. A virtuous person is one acting naturally through values acquired by everyday training, by a lifelong metanoia. Christian morality aims to form a Christian character, namely a disciple of Christ. The real disciple is the saint. In other words, the goal of Christian morality is holiness, which is fully found in God alone.
Application to the Case
Applying this Christian moral vision on our case, we discover that many values defended by Christianity are threatened. First, justice is questioned here in the issue around the distribution of wages from agricultural production. People are not guaranteed to benefit fully from the fruits of their labor. Especially, women won’t be paid fairly. Eventually, the lack of justice creates poverty and overpopulation. Population, besides being an ecological issue, becomes a social issue when human beings are unwilling to share the richness of creation. This results from the dependence of the Nigerian economy on western capitalism that does not care for local population. Justice is at the center of Christian social teaching. Every human person should benefit from the fruits of his/her labor and be paid wages that help one have a decent and human existence.
Second, in dictatorship, one cannot guarantee human freedom. Such a government cannot impose anything for the sake of common good. Also, imposing contraception, AIDS testing for women, and sterilization is dehumanizing. Human beings are not considered as adults and able to make responsible choices. Besides, the church still consider contraception and sterilization as anti nature, and against life. The issue of women rights in a polygamist society is raised here. Moreover, the clash between western culture and Yoruba traditional culture is manifested in the opposition between personal freedom and communal welfare. The Christian position on this issue is that the quest for the common good should protect also individual rights. Also, there is an understanding of the human person that needs to be criticized and integrated within the community.
Applying this Christian moral vision on our case, we discover that many values defended by Christianity are threatened. First, justice is questioned here in the issue around the distribution of wages from agricultural production. People are not guaranteed to benefit fully from the fruits of their labor. Especially, women won’t be paid fairly. Eventually, the lack of justice creates poverty and overpopulation. Population, besides being an ecological issue, becomes a social issue when human beings are unwilling to share the richness of creation. This results from the dependence of the Nigerian economy on western capitalism that does not care for local population. Justice is at the center of Christian social teaching. Every human person should benefit from the fruits of his/her labor and be paid wages that help one have a decent and human existence.
Second, in dictatorship, one cannot guarantee human freedom. Such a government cannot impose anything for the sake of common good. Also, imposing contraception, AIDS testing for women, and sterilization is dehumanizing. Human beings are not considered as adults and able to make responsible choices. Besides, the church still consider contraception and sterilization as anti nature, and against life. The issue of women rights in a polygamist society is raised here. Moreover, the clash between western culture and Yoruba traditional culture is manifested in the opposition between personal freedom and communal welfare. The Christian position on this issue is that the quest for the common good should protect also individual rights. Also, there is an understanding of the human person that needs to be criticized and integrated within the community.
Normativity
There are three methods that can apply to this case, and each has a different outcome, and focus. For my initial look into the case the method that made the most sense was the teleological method. Since the government is imposing regulations on the community, and those regulations are in part the cause for the problem in this case, the deontological method would not be the best choice, if we wish to reach a solution that both parties can benefit from. Instead of focusing on the law, and what the government says, so we give our initial thought to teleology. We need to look at the goals of the government and the goals of the community to see if there is a viable solution to achieve these goals.
Teleological Method
The first step is to posit various goal oriented solutions and their possible outcomes. The disadvantage of this method is that we can never predict the future, and that is what we are focusing on so whether or not we actually attain our goal will not be known until time passes. The other downside is that this method causes us to almost ignore the present situation and only judge the correct path to follow based on its possible future outcome.[10] So what outcomes do we hope to achieve? Ultimately we may want a peaceful cooperation between the government and the people they govern. In relation to the situation that the people find themselves in it seems that the goal would be that of pleasing both the government, and the people. That is a general goal; as per the specifics the government wants a 10% increase in production, and population control. It can be deduced from the situation that the government would rank these goals in the order given. If the people were to produce the 10% more while continuing with their traditional familial practices the government would overlook the large population. The people seem to have the biggest problem with the limiting of the number of children a woman can have. The fact that each group involved has separate goals causes trouble for this method. If we focus on one set of goals we inadvertently ignore or overlook the goals of the others. This is when a look into the norms will give us more understanding in the case.
The first step is to posit various goal oriented solutions and their possible outcomes. The disadvantage of this method is that we can never predict the future, and that is what we are focusing on so whether or not we actually attain our goal will not be known until time passes. The other downside is that this method causes us to almost ignore the present situation and only judge the correct path to follow based on its possible future outcome.[10] So what outcomes do we hope to achieve? Ultimately we may want a peaceful cooperation between the government and the people they govern. In relation to the situation that the people find themselves in it seems that the goal would be that of pleasing both the government, and the people. That is a general goal; as per the specifics the government wants a 10% increase in production, and population control. It can be deduced from the situation that the government would rank these goals in the order given. If the people were to produce the 10% more while continuing with their traditional familial practices the government would overlook the large population. The people seem to have the biggest problem with the limiting of the number of children a woman can have. The fact that each group involved has separate goals causes trouble for this method. If we focus on one set of goals we inadvertently ignore or overlook the goals of the others. This is when a look into the norms will give us more understanding in the case.
Moral Norms
Moral norms are the criteria for judging the sorts of persons we ought to be and the sorts of actions we ought to perform in a faithful response to Gods call to love. They are expressions of moral truth and not always translated into laws within a community. They provide stability and consistency and identify to the community what is expected of the individual members. [11] The norms that are held by a community give us insight to what they hold dear, and believe to be important. There are various types of norms that we will need to pay attention to in this case. Formal norms pertain to the sorts of persons we ought to be. The types of moral absolutes one finds within formal norms relate to that which is permanent and reflects what is universal to humankind such as security and the golden rule. Synthetic terms also reflect formal norms held within certain communities or cultures. These terms bear a moral qualification as part of their meaning. An example of this would be the word ‘lie’ within the word one gets a sense of its wrongness as opposed to ‘falsehood’ which carries no moral qualification. Material norms pertain to the types of actions we ought to perform but do not take into account all aspects of the action.[12] The moral absolutes found in material norms indicate to us what actions are always required or forbidden, and that no one can claim total knowledge of any specific action. Virtually exceptionless norms are those that replace the thought of absolute norms. Since one cannot demonstrate an absolute norm, one sees it as a virtually exceptionless norm that highlights values that in almost every case should be preferred. For Christians one has to take into account the norms related to Jesus, they realize that the call of the reign of God requires a response. The moral imagination also plays a role in normativity, it allows us to make appropriate connections between moral experiences and abstract ideas related to them, helps us appreciate the limitations of moral norms, and helps us apply moral norms.[13]
Moral norms are the criteria for judging the sorts of persons we ought to be and the sorts of actions we ought to perform in a faithful response to Gods call to love. They are expressions of moral truth and not always translated into laws within a community. They provide stability and consistency and identify to the community what is expected of the individual members. [11] The norms that are held by a community give us insight to what they hold dear, and believe to be important. There are various types of norms that we will need to pay attention to in this case. Formal norms pertain to the sorts of persons we ought to be. The types of moral absolutes one finds within formal norms relate to that which is permanent and reflects what is universal to humankind such as security and the golden rule. Synthetic terms also reflect formal norms held within certain communities or cultures. These terms bear a moral qualification as part of their meaning. An example of this would be the word ‘lie’ within the word one gets a sense of its wrongness as opposed to ‘falsehood’ which carries no moral qualification. Material norms pertain to the types of actions we ought to perform but do not take into account all aspects of the action.[12] The moral absolutes found in material norms indicate to us what actions are always required or forbidden, and that no one can claim total knowledge of any specific action. Virtually exceptionless norms are those that replace the thought of absolute norms. Since one cannot demonstrate an absolute norm, one sees it as a virtually exceptionless norm that highlights values that in almost every case should be preferred. For Christians one has to take into account the norms related to Jesus, they realize that the call of the reign of God requires a response. The moral imagination also plays a role in normativity, it allows us to make appropriate connections between moral experiences and abstract ideas related to them, helps us appreciate the limitations of moral norms, and helps us apply moral norms.[13]
Community Norms
The norms that are present in this community revolve around familial relationships. The existence of polygamy is a cultural norm within this community, not everyone practices it, but it seems to be an accepted practice. The role that children play in the life of the people is also an important norm to attend to. They are seen as gifts from God, and that you will have as many children as God wills thus they do not believe in contraception. The children are also expected to work the crops of their father. This is a patriarchal society so the norms that revolve around the men and women in the community greatly affect our case. The man is the head of the household and is the sole beneficiary of the work that the women and children do in the crops. Each wife has a separate budget to work with to feed herself and her children. If the man has multiple wives then there are multiple budgets, not a single-family budget. The women earn their own living through trading which supports them and their children. When a child is born the husband follows a 3-year period of abstinence with that wife as a period of time for mother-child bonding. There is a sense that this is a very strongly held norm as in the text it states that if this is not observed the husband will be publicly censured. In this society the larger the family the more prosperous they are, it also carries status within the community.
The norms that are present in this community revolve around familial relationships. The existence of polygamy is a cultural norm within this community, not everyone practices it, but it seems to be an accepted practice. The role that children play in the life of the people is also an important norm to attend to. They are seen as gifts from God, and that you will have as many children as God wills thus they do not believe in contraception. The children are also expected to work the crops of their father. This is a patriarchal society so the norms that revolve around the men and women in the community greatly affect our case. The man is the head of the household and is the sole beneficiary of the work that the women and children do in the crops. Each wife has a separate budget to work with to feed herself and her children. If the man has multiple wives then there are multiple budgets, not a single-family budget. The women earn their own living through trading which supports them and their children. When a child is born the husband follows a 3-year period of abstinence with that wife as a period of time for mother-child bonding. There is a sense that this is a very strongly held norm as in the text it states that if this is not observed the husband will be publicly censured. In this society the larger the family the more prosperous they are, it also carries status within the community.
Norms and the Methods
The way that norms work in relationship with these models depends greatly on the method chosen. Within the teleological method the importance or relevance of the norms is measured by the consequences of upholding these norms. An example of this in relation to our case would be setting the goal that of producing the requested 15 percent increase in production. There are several norms that come into conflict when seeking this goal that of the men do not work the crops, and the norm that the women provide the income through trading in their extra time to care for their children. If we uphold the norm that women and children work the crops the women will have less time to trade thus having less money to care for their children. If we insist that women will not work more, thus allowing them the time to trade and earn an income, then the norm that men do not work the crops must be conceded. The teleological method assesses the value of the norms involved and chooses the option, which produces the greatest possible value in its consequences. The hub of moral reality method, which is a relational responsible method, uses norms in a much different way. In this method one chooses what to do by determining what action is most proportionate to the meaning of the whole relational context. Using the previous example this method would look into the relationship the norms have with the people involved, and the relationships of the people involved.
The way that norms work in relationship with these models depends greatly on the method chosen. Within the teleological method the importance or relevance of the norms is measured by the consequences of upholding these norms. An example of this in relation to our case would be setting the goal that of producing the requested 15 percent increase in production. There are several norms that come into conflict when seeking this goal that of the men do not work the crops, and the norm that the women provide the income through trading in their extra time to care for their children. If we uphold the norm that women and children work the crops the women will have less time to trade thus having less money to care for their children. If we insist that women will not work more, thus allowing them the time to trade and earn an income, then the norm that men do not work the crops must be conceded. The teleological method assesses the value of the norms involved and chooses the option, which produces the greatest possible value in its consequences. The hub of moral reality method, which is a relational responsible method, uses norms in a much different way. In this method one chooses what to do by determining what action is most proportionate to the meaning of the whole relational context. Using the previous example this method would look into the relationship the norms have with the people involved, and the relationships of the people involved.
Conscience
Making a judgment about the Case Study also requires us to consider the role of moral conscience. In order to do this task, we should first understand what moral conscience is and how it works when we make judgments. First, we notice that moral conscience is usually misunderstood with psychological superego. On one hand, superego means that moral development and maturity is subjected to the external control of laws and authority due to the fear of punishment and the yearning for being lovable (Gula 125). Superego makes people submitted to laws and authority without much questioning why they have to do that; it usually makes people to have blind obedience. In terms of superego, people try to follow “should” and “have to,” that is, they try to precisely follow the regulations, orders, commands of laws and authority and focus on individual action apart from total context. Superego makes people rely on external guidance (Gula 126). On the other hand, moral conscience is more internal and self-directing. It is the development of morality for oneself as one’s character, and it leads to personally moral maturity. People of moral conscience will not blindly follow authority; rather, they learn and develop their commitment to love of values (Gula 127). Thus, they committed to the values in freedom and focus on larger context of person’s life. In short, moral conscience is an expression of the whole person in making moral decisions in three dimensions: 1) conscience/1 (synderesis) is the general sense of morality; 2) conscience/2 (moral science) is to search objective moral values such as moral teachings and norms; and 3) conscience/3 (conscience) is to judge and act based on perception and reasoning (Gula 131-133).
Moral conscience is formed by to follow natural law that helps us to build up moral characters and to do reasonable acts. For a Christian, it also is a dialogue with sources of moral wisdom such as human experiences, Christian values, and Catholic teachings that helps us to act in our Christian characters formed by Jesus’ words (Gula 137). The formation of conscience helps us to see, interpret, and value issues morally. It helps us to see the reality, not what we want to see. In making moral decisions, we must include the teachings of magisterium because: 1) it is the teachings of the church authority guided by the Holy Spirit; 2) it provides a structure to confused issues and helps us understanding the Gospel’s teachings; 3) it fosters, protects, and improves human values. Including authority teaching in making moral decision does not mean blindly obedience nor to ignore it. A good Catholic wants to obey the teachings of authorities, but if they cannot due to their own situations, they have to resolve the issue as best as they can (Gula 160). The Church values conscience, which is defined as the sanctuary of a person in solitude with God whose voice guides him/her inwardly (John Paul II, # 55). However, moral conscience may have the possibility of error because of human invincible ignorance. Thus, “the conscience must be ‘confirmed by the Holy Spirit’ (cf. Rom 9:1); it must be ‘clear’ (2 Tim 1:3); it must not ‘practise cunning and tamper with God's word’, but ‘openly state the truth’ (cf. 2 Cor 4:2)” (John Paul, #62). Jesus has warned us, "The lamp of the body is the eye. If your eye is sound, your whole body will be filled with light; but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be in darkness. And if the light in you is darkness, how great will the darkness be" (Mt 6:22-23).
Moral conscience is formed by to follow natural law that helps us to build up moral characters and to do reasonable acts. For a Christian, it also is a dialogue with sources of moral wisdom such as human experiences, Christian values, and Catholic teachings that helps us to act in our Christian characters formed by Jesus’ words (Gula 137). The formation of conscience helps us to see, interpret, and value issues morally. It helps us to see the reality, not what we want to see. In making moral decisions, we must include the teachings of magisterium because: 1) it is the teachings of the church authority guided by the Holy Spirit; 2) it provides a structure to confused issues and helps us understanding the Gospel’s teachings; 3) it fosters, protects, and improves human values. Including authority teaching in making moral decision does not mean blindly obedience nor to ignore it. A good Catholic wants to obey the teachings of authorities, but if they cannot due to their own situations, they have to resolve the issue as best as they can (Gula 160). The Church values conscience, which is defined as the sanctuary of a person in solitude with God whose voice guides him/her inwardly (John Paul II, # 55). However, moral conscience may have the possibility of error because of human invincible ignorance. Thus, “the conscience must be ‘confirmed by the Holy Spirit’ (cf. Rom 9:1); it must be ‘clear’ (2 Tim 1:3); it must not ‘practise cunning and tamper with God's word’, but ‘openly state the truth’ (cf. 2 Cor 4:2)” (John Paul, #62). Jesus has warned us, "The lamp of the body is the eye. If your eye is sound, your whole body will be filled with light; but if your eye is bad, your whole body will be in darkness. And if the light in you is darkness, how great will the darkness be" (Mt 6:22-23).
Application of Conscience to Case Study
In the case study, the role of moral conscience affects us to make the judgment in various ways. The main issue is how to achieve the goal of increasing agricultural products while keeping the birth rate low. Conscience requires us to respect both the tradition and culture of the Yuroba society and human freedom. We should consider both the traditional practice of polygamy and the quest for freedom, especially the freedom of women, in making choice for family plan. Also, we examine the problem of overpopulation and global competition as well as the quest for better life and social justice. Nigeria is “the most populous nation in Africa” (Gudorf 199), and it has to endure the pressure of controlling the birth rate from “developed nations” (Gudorf 202). In the quest for global competition and improvement of people’s life, the plan of the government is reasonable, but how to achieve it should be considered because it conflicts with the tradition of polygamy and big-sized family. Also, conscience requires us to be sensitive to the possibility of conflict between religions where the plan of the government from the North of Muslim Hausa culture with the South Yoruba villages where many Christian live (Gudorf 199). Moreover, conscience also helps us see the issue in the light of social change possibility for life improvement and equality for women. We should consider the issue both in common morality and in the light of Christian morality, that is, how to deal the issue with the best possibility in terms human dignity as well as the Gospel’s teaching.
In the case study, the role of moral conscience affects us to make the judgment in various ways. The main issue is how to achieve the goal of increasing agricultural products while keeping the birth rate low. Conscience requires us to respect both the tradition and culture of the Yuroba society and human freedom. We should consider both the traditional practice of polygamy and the quest for freedom, especially the freedom of women, in making choice for family plan. Also, we examine the problem of overpopulation and global competition as well as the quest for better life and social justice. Nigeria is “the most populous nation in Africa” (Gudorf 199), and it has to endure the pressure of controlling the birth rate from “developed nations” (Gudorf 202). In the quest for global competition and improvement of people’s life, the plan of the government is reasonable, but how to achieve it should be considered because it conflicts with the tradition of polygamy and big-sized family. Also, conscience requires us to be sensitive to the possibility of conflict between religions where the plan of the government from the North of Muslim Hausa culture with the South Yoruba villages where many Christian live (Gudorf 199). Moreover, conscience also helps us see the issue in the light of social change possibility for life improvement and equality for women. We should consider the issue both in common morality and in the light of Christian morality, that is, how to deal the issue with the best possibility in terms human dignity as well as the Gospel’s teaching.
Relational Responsibility Method
The wheel hub method to moral reality is the method that will achieve the most accurate gathering and measuring of the information that is needed to come to a conclusion with this case. It allows one to view the various influences that are pertinent to the case. This method allows these influences to be in dialogue with the facts of the case, both allowing a deeper view of the facts, and in turn allowing the facts to give keys to the importance of the various influences.
The wheel hub method to moral reality is the method that will achieve the most accurate gathering and measuring of the information that is needed to come to a conclusion with this case. It allows one to view the various influences that are pertinent to the case. This method allows these influences to be in dialogue with the facts of the case, both allowing a deeper view of the facts, and in turn allowing the facts to give keys to the importance of the various influences.
Authority and Principles
There are multiple layers of authority present within this Yoruban society. Starting with the country government on down to the individual people within the community. The principles that drive these authorities, and the authority they actually hold with the people are important. Each spoke on the wheel is related to the next. Authority is related to right reason, principles, affectivity, and individual and group experience. Right reason tests the authorities involved instead of taking what they say without qualification. Principles are related to authorities in that they carry authority of their own within the community that holds to these principles. Affectivity influences the way we look at authority in that it can balance attitudes held toward the experts’ knowledge by being placed in perspective through questioning and use of common sense. Individual and group experience also gives us insight into the role that authority plays in the community. When one looks at individual and group experience, one can discern where they place authority in their lives.
There are multiple layers of authority present within this Yoruban society. Starting with the country government on down to the individual people within the community. The principles that drive these authorities, and the authority they actually hold with the people are important. Each spoke on the wheel is related to the next. Authority is related to right reason, principles, affectivity, and individual and group experience. Right reason tests the authorities involved instead of taking what they say without qualification. Principles are related to authorities in that they carry authority of their own within the community that holds to these principles. Affectivity influences the way we look at authority in that it can balance attitudes held toward the experts’ knowledge by being placed in perspective through questioning and use of common sense. Individual and group experience also gives us insight into the role that authority plays in the community. When one looks at individual and group experience, one can discern where they place authority in their lives.
Peer and Expert Authority
The colonel who presented the plan to the district officials emerged from a military culture, which eliminates any need to consult with subordinates, and also from a Muslim Hausa culture that dictates less independence and fewer economic roles for women. Keke Omuji, the district official for a small state in southwestern Nigeria fears that army authoritarianism and Hausa attitudes could be real problems. He is the one who has to tell his district what needs to be done. He gathers together the village chiefs and elders, the president of the market association, the officers of the Trader Clubs, and the doctor and nurses who ran the health clinics. The fact that these groups show up when he calls them together is important in showing us his power and importance within the district. This meeting also shows us what other groups have authority in the district for he would not have invited them if they did not. Within these groups there are individuals that show leadership and authority by speaking up when they feel they have something important to say. Christine Ciroma is the first one of such people to speak. She was trained as a nurse practitioner in the United States, having a western education may influence the types of objections she raises. She is also one of the health workers and a member of a prominent local family; both tell us that she must carry some authority. One fact that we do not want to overlook is that Keke responds to Christine, and that the district official would find it important enough to respond to her lets us know that she definitely has authority. The next person to speak is Edward Oyeluso, an elder. Being an elder gives him authority, as well as the fact that this is a patriarchal society, since he is a man he has a certain authority, valid or not it is there. Chief Simi follows Edward and also for the same reasons carries authority, although probably in a different way since he is a chief. The only hint at a lack of authority is that neither of the men are given a response by anyone, much less the district official Keke. Betty Olysanye is the next to speak, and the authority she carries is evident in that immediately Keke attempts to respond to her objection. One thing that must be noted about peer authority in the Yoruban culture is that one of the ever-present norms is that the needs of the community come before the needs of the individual, so much more authority is given to community, or the group, than an individual.[14]
The colonel who presented the plan to the district officials emerged from a military culture, which eliminates any need to consult with subordinates, and also from a Muslim Hausa culture that dictates less independence and fewer economic roles for women. Keke Omuji, the district official for a small state in southwestern Nigeria fears that army authoritarianism and Hausa attitudes could be real problems. He is the one who has to tell his district what needs to be done. He gathers together the village chiefs and elders, the president of the market association, the officers of the Trader Clubs, and the doctor and nurses who ran the health clinics. The fact that these groups show up when he calls them together is important in showing us his power and importance within the district. This meeting also shows us what other groups have authority in the district for he would not have invited them if they did not. Within these groups there are individuals that show leadership and authority by speaking up when they feel they have something important to say. Christine Ciroma is the first one of such people to speak. She was trained as a nurse practitioner in the United States, having a western education may influence the types of objections she raises. She is also one of the health workers and a member of a prominent local family; both tell us that she must carry some authority. One fact that we do not want to overlook is that Keke responds to Christine, and that the district official would find it important enough to respond to her lets us know that she definitely has authority. The next person to speak is Edward Oyeluso, an elder. Being an elder gives him authority, as well as the fact that this is a patriarchal society, since he is a man he has a certain authority, valid or not it is there. Chief Simi follows Edward and also for the same reasons carries authority, although probably in a different way since he is a chief. The only hint at a lack of authority is that neither of the men are given a response by anyone, much less the district official Keke. Betty Olysanye is the next to speak, and the authority she carries is evident in that immediately Keke attempts to respond to her objection. One thing that must be noted about peer authority in the Yoruban culture is that one of the ever-present norms is that the needs of the community come before the needs of the individual, so much more authority is given to community, or the group, than an individual.[14]
Authority in Tradition
The Yoruban tradition carries much more authority than any of the individual people in this district. There are several points of reference within the text. The first indication of it is within the fear Keke has about the success of the plan. This fear comes from knowing the society and their traditions and the authority that they hold with the people. Other instances that show the strength of tradition revolve around the relationships between men and women. Christine is the first to express concern about the women’s role. The language she uses shows us that there is something in the tradition that she fears will never change, things that are unchangeable have a certain power to them. There are many such instances that show the power of tradition over women, men and children alike.
The Yoruban tradition carries much more authority than any of the individual people in this district. There are several points of reference within the text. The first indication of it is within the fear Keke has about the success of the plan. This fear comes from knowing the society and their traditions and the authority that they hold with the people. Other instances that show the strength of tradition revolve around the relationships between men and women. Christine is the first to express concern about the women’s role. The language she uses shows us that there is something in the tradition that she fears will never change, things that are unchangeable have a certain power to them. There are many such instances that show the power of tradition over women, men and children alike.
Religious Authority
The religious authority within the community is not very visible. The Magisterial authority is influential specifically in our group finding a resolution to the case. Since our group comes from the Roman Catholic Church there is a magisterial authority over moral issues of contraception, marriage, and justice. We must recognize such authority and the role it plays in such a situation. Since the community is not a distinctly Christian community it cannot have absolute authority in any way shape or form, however we, as Catholics, must consult our faith to give us guidance on the issues relevant to this case.
The religious authority within the community is not very visible. The Magisterial authority is influential specifically in our group finding a resolution to the case. Since our group comes from the Roman Catholic Church there is a magisterial authority over moral issues of contraception, marriage, and justice. We must recognize such authority and the role it plays in such a situation. Since the community is not a distinctly Christian community it cannot have absolute authority in any way shape or form, however we, as Catholics, must consult our faith to give us guidance on the issues relevant to this case.
Group Experience
The case describes issues within a Yoruba village. Two cultures coexist and seemed in opposition. There is a western worldview that is taking roots and a traditional worldview that struggles to survive. The village is multi-religiously constituted: Christians, Muslims and Yoruban. Polygamy, overpopulation and agriculture seem shared experiences, along with injustice against women. Most of the people are opposed to the decisions of the government. These decisions, namely the imposition of contraception and sterilization with the increase of production, are in opposition with traditional values family solidarity, children and communal ownership of the land.
Individual Experience
Ø Keke: is the government agent. He calls the meeting just to inform the population about the government’s decisions. He is not concerned by what would be right. Instead of speaking on behalf of the people, he is concerned about pleasing his superiors.
Ø Christine, a nurse trained in USA, married to a catholic, she is against polygamy. She expresses health concerns over Keke’s propositions. She worries about privacy and medical deontology. She challenges the authority and proposes traditional solutions to issues of contraception and sterilization.
Ø Siti, a nurse and Muslim, made her husband write a contract stating that he won’t marry a second wife. She is against polygamy. She argues inn the sense of Christine, showing that contraception threatens traditional abstinence.
Ø Alice, a nurse as well, seems to defend her brother’s job. She argues in the sense of western worldview against polygamy and women rights, challenging her colleagues. For her, it is time to throw away traditional culture and open up to western culture.
Ø Betty Olusanye questions Keke’s plan, regarding women’s health, family size, fair wages, production and poverty. She does identify the government as the responsible for such plans.
Ø Chief Simi expresses the traditional understanding of children and the reasons of polygamy. He fears that contraception and sterilization may spoil the future of the family. For him, family size depends on the ability of a woman to have many children, and for economic reasons, at best two wives may be “affordable”.
Ø Edward Oyeluso raises also the reason behind the practice of polygamy and the issue over the status of women in the traditional and patriarchal society. As an elder, he symbolizes the cultural tradition and heritage.
The case describes issues within a Yoruba village. Two cultures coexist and seemed in opposition. There is a western worldview that is taking roots and a traditional worldview that struggles to survive. The village is multi-religiously constituted: Christians, Muslims and Yoruban. Polygamy, overpopulation and agriculture seem shared experiences, along with injustice against women. Most of the people are opposed to the decisions of the government. These decisions, namely the imposition of contraception and sterilization with the increase of production, are in opposition with traditional values family solidarity, children and communal ownership of the land.
Individual Experience
Ø Keke: is the government agent. He calls the meeting just to inform the population about the government’s decisions. He is not concerned by what would be right. Instead of speaking on behalf of the people, he is concerned about pleasing his superiors.
Ø Christine, a nurse trained in USA, married to a catholic, she is against polygamy. She expresses health concerns over Keke’s propositions. She worries about privacy and medical deontology. She challenges the authority and proposes traditional solutions to issues of contraception and sterilization.
Ø Siti, a nurse and Muslim, made her husband write a contract stating that he won’t marry a second wife. She is against polygamy. She argues inn the sense of Christine, showing that contraception threatens traditional abstinence.
Ø Alice, a nurse as well, seems to defend her brother’s job. She argues in the sense of western worldview against polygamy and women rights, challenging her colleagues. For her, it is time to throw away traditional culture and open up to western culture.
Ø Betty Olusanye questions Keke’s plan, regarding women’s health, family size, fair wages, production and poverty. She does identify the government as the responsible for such plans.
Ø Chief Simi expresses the traditional understanding of children and the reasons of polygamy. He fears that contraception and sterilization may spoil the future of the family. For him, family size depends on the ability of a woman to have many children, and for economic reasons, at best two wives may be “affordable”.
Ø Edward Oyeluso raises also the reason behind the practice of polygamy and the issue over the status of women in the traditional and patriarchal society. As an elder, he symbolizes the cultural tradition and heritage.
Reason/Analysis
We think that the case study present a complicated issue. On one hand, we consider the reality that Nigeria, as the most populous country in Africa, has to cope with. On the other hand, we consider the problem that the Yoruba people, especially the women, are facing. We recognize that in today’s relationship between countries, the effect of globalization should be considered. In the reality of globalization, others affect Nigeria. It has to face with the problem of overpopulation; and its government has to consider it seriously. Nigeria expects to receive funds from the United Nations for health improvement, and it expectation to improve people health and reduce child birth death should be encouraged in the sense that it respects human lives and tries to improve living condition. But receiving fund for health care goes along with birth control as a condition since a better health care means more survive children that make the problem of overpopulation worse. The plan to increase field production is good since more crop products means more food for people and also contribute to the national prosperity. The 10 percent more products will be contributed haft for local market and haft for export (Gudorf 200). Having more products for export also helps economic growth nationally, and the government’s plan is good in that sense because in general, a country without economical growth will be left behind; it will face more disadvantages in international relations, possibly more foreign controls. Thus, the government’s goals of increasing crop products and lowering birth rate are generally good; they sound morally since they respect human life and seek to improve people’s life condition.
But the ways that the government applies to achieve such goals should be reconsidered since they are not morally good. First, the government’s plan of increasing field crops violates the fairness and social justice between men and women.. It forces them to work more, and it controls their body. Though Keke insists that increasing field crops will not be a problem since women either can be paid for their extra work or the extra crops can be used for family expense, but the men object such ideas since paying women for their extra work will “take all their profit from the extra production” (Gudorf 200). This objection reflects the selfishness of men. They want to have extra crops without paying extra wages. In common sense, if they do not do extra work, they should not claim the extra profit. Paul said, “If a man will not work, he shall not eat” (2Thes 3:10). The extra profit should be paid for the women since they will work more. The majority of women will not do more work unless they and their children will be better off (Gudorf 202), and they are morally right in such decision. Their argument reflects the fairness and equality. Thus, to call people to participate in the plan, the government should address more on the men’s cooperative attitude.
Second, the other side of the plan, to lower the birth rate, by requiring the women to visit a clinic annually violates the tradition of large-sized family and the freedom of women. Especially, it is unjust when it aims to punish only women if they fail to do so. The objections of Edward Oyeluso and Chief Simi indicate that men like to have more children since larger household size means better status and power in Yoruba society (Gudorf 200-201). The women concern more about how the government forces them to control birth rate. Betty Olusanye feels that the plan will not bring benefit to women but control them more (Gudorf 201). Also, the nurses fear that they have to do immoral works such as to monitor, report, and force women to use contraceptives (Gudorf 202). This plan obviously affects the life of women; and the way it carries out is unjust for women. In terms of Christian morality, this way to achieve birth control is immoral since it forces women to do something against their conscience; neither is it in accordance with the teaching of the church. Though we will not encourage women to do such contraception in the way that the government wants, but if a woman does so, we do not think that she is morally responsible for that action since she is forced to do so.
We think that the case study present a complicated issue. On one hand, we consider the reality that Nigeria, as the most populous country in Africa, has to cope with. On the other hand, we consider the problem that the Yoruba people, especially the women, are facing. We recognize that in today’s relationship between countries, the effect of globalization should be considered. In the reality of globalization, others affect Nigeria. It has to face with the problem of overpopulation; and its government has to consider it seriously. Nigeria expects to receive funds from the United Nations for health improvement, and it expectation to improve people health and reduce child birth death should be encouraged in the sense that it respects human lives and tries to improve living condition. But receiving fund for health care goes along with birth control as a condition since a better health care means more survive children that make the problem of overpopulation worse. The plan to increase field production is good since more crop products means more food for people and also contribute to the national prosperity. The 10 percent more products will be contributed haft for local market and haft for export (Gudorf 200). Having more products for export also helps economic growth nationally, and the government’s plan is good in that sense because in general, a country without economical growth will be left behind; it will face more disadvantages in international relations, possibly more foreign controls. Thus, the government’s goals of increasing crop products and lowering birth rate are generally good; they sound morally since they respect human life and seek to improve people’s life condition.
But the ways that the government applies to achieve such goals should be reconsidered since they are not morally good. First, the government’s plan of increasing field crops violates the fairness and social justice between men and women.. It forces them to work more, and it controls their body. Though Keke insists that increasing field crops will not be a problem since women either can be paid for their extra work or the extra crops can be used for family expense, but the men object such ideas since paying women for their extra work will “take all their profit from the extra production” (Gudorf 200). This objection reflects the selfishness of men. They want to have extra crops without paying extra wages. In common sense, if they do not do extra work, they should not claim the extra profit. Paul said, “If a man will not work, he shall not eat” (2Thes 3:10). The extra profit should be paid for the women since they will work more. The majority of women will not do more work unless they and their children will be better off (Gudorf 202), and they are morally right in such decision. Their argument reflects the fairness and equality. Thus, to call people to participate in the plan, the government should address more on the men’s cooperative attitude.
Second, the other side of the plan, to lower the birth rate, by requiring the women to visit a clinic annually violates the tradition of large-sized family and the freedom of women. Especially, it is unjust when it aims to punish only women if they fail to do so. The objections of Edward Oyeluso and Chief Simi indicate that men like to have more children since larger household size means better status and power in Yoruba society (Gudorf 200-201). The women concern more about how the government forces them to control birth rate. Betty Olusanye feels that the plan will not bring benefit to women but control them more (Gudorf 201). Also, the nurses fear that they have to do immoral works such as to monitor, report, and force women to use contraceptives (Gudorf 202). This plan obviously affects the life of women; and the way it carries out is unjust for women. In terms of Christian morality, this way to achieve birth control is immoral since it forces women to do something against their conscience; neither is it in accordance with the teaching of the church. Though we will not encourage women to do such contraception in the way that the government wants, but if a woman does so, we do not think that she is morally responsible for that action since she is forced to do so.
Resolution
Within this case there are many issues that we felt needed to be addressed. Each of these could benefit from more information, from the government, the community, and the individuals involved in the case. With several of the problems we can only posit educated guesses because there is a large enough gap between the information we need and the information that we have. The issues that we address are abuse of power, polygamy, woman’s rights, contraception and overpopulation, and individual versus communal rights.
Abuse of Power
Several key players fit into this problem. The most evident in the government, instead of holding councils with the chiefs, which is the way to get things done in the Yoruban society[15], they send in district officials to tell the people what they are going to have to do, under penalty of military involvement. Not only does it seem that from a western view this as an abuse of power, however the reaction that the people have is much the same as ours, and it is evident that it is not accepted even among them. The government here is not the only one abusing the power, or authority, that is given them. Keke could have made this transition much easier, and more widely accepted had he followed and recognized the leadership already present in the communities. We believe that to curb this abuse this is exactly what is needed to be done, recognize the leadership within these communities and follow the long standing, traditional, channels of communication.
Several key players fit into this problem. The most evident in the government, instead of holding councils with the chiefs, which is the way to get things done in the Yoruban society[15], they send in district officials to tell the people what they are going to have to do, under penalty of military involvement. Not only does it seem that from a western view this as an abuse of power, however the reaction that the people have is much the same as ours, and it is evident that it is not accepted even among them. The government here is not the only one abusing the power, or authority, that is given them. Keke could have made this transition much easier, and more widely accepted had he followed and recognized the leadership already present in the communities. We believe that to curb this abuse this is exactly what is needed to be done, recognize the leadership within these communities and follow the long standing, traditional, channels of communication.
Polygamy
When our group decided to look into polygamy as a moral issue within this case we knew we would have to look at it from a distinctively Christian point of view. Not just marriage itself, but the relationships that exist within the communities. Marriage is exactly what links these communities together, in one way or another most of the people in these villages are related to one another. We cannot just walk into this sort of situation and declare that monogamy is the rule, and that all other than the first spouse were illegitimate, that would create chaos within the community as well as cause a great injustice to those women, as widows, with no family, or financial support. They would more than likely be lead to prostitution or starvation. As Christians we are to care for the dignity of the human person and this course of action would not accomplish this goal. If we are to suggest a distinctly Christian solution to this problem the best option would be to recognize the existing structure, not negating any of the prior commitments, but stress the importance of monogamy, just short of insisting that it be the norm.
When our group decided to look into polygamy as a moral issue within this case we knew we would have to look at it from a distinctively Christian point of view. Not just marriage itself, but the relationships that exist within the communities. Marriage is exactly what links these communities together, in one way or another most of the people in these villages are related to one another. We cannot just walk into this sort of situation and declare that monogamy is the rule, and that all other than the first spouse were illegitimate, that would create chaos within the community as well as cause a great injustice to those women, as widows, with no family, or financial support. They would more than likely be lead to prostitution or starvation. As Christians we are to care for the dignity of the human person and this course of action would not accomplish this goal. If we are to suggest a distinctly Christian solution to this problem the best option would be to recognize the existing structure, not negating any of the prior commitments, but stress the importance of monogamy, just short of insisting that it be the norm.
Women’s Rights
Another issue that this case raises is about women rights. Being a woman seems a curse in this patriarchal and sexist society. How can one guarantee the dignity of woman in society where she is looked upon as a machine for procreation and a force of production? The government is unjust towards them in proposing them lesser wages than they deserve. Moreover, the government does not respect their freedom and responsibility when it imposes a sterilization and contraceptive plan. Some changes need to be made in this Yoruban society. Men and women are created equal. Women are image of God and deserve their human dignity. Although in a patriarchal society a male child is the bearer of family name, girls need to be given the same chance and the same opportunities, especially regarding education and respect in their homes. The dignity of a mother of a wife does not depend on the number of kids she can have, or on how much she contributes to the economy of the family. Also, for Christian tradition, children are not the primary goal of marriage. Children flow from mutual love that God infuses in a man and a woman, and that brings them together. It is hard to maintain such an understanding of marriage and of the dignity of women in a polygamist society. Polygamy needs to be banned from human society. It is one of the factors in the spread of AIDS, due to infidelity, and one of the causes of overpopulation. A ban over polygamy would be a step against overpopulation before contraception.
In addition, the role of women in a society is very vital. As human persons, their freedom and responsibility have to be respected. The government should not impose anything prior to a public consultation. The understanding of the traditional abstinence needs to be retrieved and updated in order to give a chance to women to convince their husband. Also a consensus should be achieved between the government, women and their husbands about the extra work and proportionate wages. The increase of production should not be fostered to the detriment of justice. This justice includes also the preferential option for the poor. The women need wages that allow them to a decent and human life.
Another issue that this case raises is about women rights. Being a woman seems a curse in this patriarchal and sexist society. How can one guarantee the dignity of woman in society where she is looked upon as a machine for procreation and a force of production? The government is unjust towards them in proposing them lesser wages than they deserve. Moreover, the government does not respect their freedom and responsibility when it imposes a sterilization and contraceptive plan. Some changes need to be made in this Yoruban society. Men and women are created equal. Women are image of God and deserve their human dignity. Although in a patriarchal society a male child is the bearer of family name, girls need to be given the same chance and the same opportunities, especially regarding education and respect in their homes. The dignity of a mother of a wife does not depend on the number of kids she can have, or on how much she contributes to the economy of the family. Also, for Christian tradition, children are not the primary goal of marriage. Children flow from mutual love that God infuses in a man and a woman, and that brings them together. It is hard to maintain such an understanding of marriage and of the dignity of women in a polygamist society. Polygamy needs to be banned from human society. It is one of the factors in the spread of AIDS, due to infidelity, and one of the causes of overpopulation. A ban over polygamy would be a step against overpopulation before contraception.
In addition, the role of women in a society is very vital. As human persons, their freedom and responsibility have to be respected. The government should not impose anything prior to a public consultation. The understanding of the traditional abstinence needs to be retrieved and updated in order to give a chance to women to convince their husband. Also a consensus should be achieved between the government, women and their husbands about the extra work and proportionate wages. The increase of production should not be fostered to the detriment of justice. This justice includes also the preferential option for the poor. The women need wages that allow them to a decent and human life.
Contraception and Overpopulation
Many wrongs are committed in the proposed population control of the government to various groups of people. Not only is contraception is an issue mainly for Catholic Christians, but it violates the bodies and freedom of women, which was discussed in the previous section. The encyclical Humanae Vitae reemphasized the Catholic Church’s teaching that it is intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence. The problem here is that we are facing a serious problem with overpopulation. Overpopulation is a serious concern for it is estimated that by the year 2030 if the trend continues the population of this region will increase from 520,000,000 in 1990 to near 1,200,000,000[16]. If we ignore the teaching of the church and support the enforcement of contraception we may, in the long run, have an effect on Overpopulation. If we follow the teaching of the church then we risk overpopulation. The question here is whether or not is realistic to attempt a natural method like natural family planning. This is where we must gather more information about the local people, and assess their attitudes to such a method. However that only gets us past the method of population control, not the underlying issue, which is the norms that are present within the community that surround the family life and children as have been previously stated. A solution to this latter dilemma
Many wrongs are committed in the proposed population control of the government to various groups of people. Not only is contraception is an issue mainly for Catholic Christians, but it violates the bodies and freedom of women, which was discussed in the previous section. The encyclical Humanae Vitae reemphasized the Catholic Church’s teaching that it is intrinsically wrong to use contraception to prevent new human beings from coming into existence. The problem here is that we are facing a serious problem with overpopulation. Overpopulation is a serious concern for it is estimated that by the year 2030 if the trend continues the population of this region will increase from 520,000,000 in 1990 to near 1,200,000,000[16]. If we ignore the teaching of the church and support the enforcement of contraception we may, in the long run, have an effect on Overpopulation. If we follow the teaching of the church then we risk overpopulation. The question here is whether or not is realistic to attempt a natural method like natural family planning. This is where we must gather more information about the local people, and assess their attitudes to such a method. However that only gets us past the method of population control, not the underlying issue, which is the norms that are present within the community that surround the family life and children as have been previously stated. A solution to this latter dilemma
Individual versus Communal Rights
Finally, individual rights seem in conflict with communal ownership and rights. For the Christian morality, individualism and communal tyranny are both sinful. The goal of communal structures is the common good, which guarantees individual welfare. As a military regime, the government has lost its credibility and legitimacy; therefore, it cannot pretend to be an agent of the common good. Personal interests will always motivate whatever decision such a government can take. On the other hand, women and men of this village should acknowledge that overpopulation endangers world welfare. Also, they need to think about poor village that would benefit from the increase of production. Therefore, in order to restore confidence into the government, the military regime needs to be removed and replaced by a government issued from the people.
Finally, individual rights seem in conflict with communal ownership and rights. For the Christian morality, individualism and communal tyranny are both sinful. The goal of communal structures is the common good, which guarantees individual welfare. As a military regime, the government has lost its credibility and legitimacy; therefore, it cannot pretend to be an agent of the common good. Personal interests will always motivate whatever decision such a government can take. On the other hand, women and men of this village should acknowledge that overpopulation endangers world welfare. Also, they need to think about poor village that would benefit from the increase of production. Therefore, in order to restore confidence into the government, the military regime needs to be removed and replaced by a government issued from the people.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we acknowledge that there are many pieces of this case that are missing and that could lead to a better understanding and solution of the problem. But still, we believe that the resolution of this case should happen at two levels. First, at the local level, a dialogue needs to start between the different cultures and religions in presence. It can be a dialogue between modernity that is invading the village and traditional culture that strives to preserve itself. Also, Christians – and merely Catholics-, Muslims and Yoruban need to dialogue about the understanding of traditional values and on how to address public issues such as poverty and overpopulation. In particular, the Catholic Church has the task of inculturation with her vision of marriage within this polygamist society. Finally, this case requires a national and international solution. At the national level, the government should be changed and replaced by one elected by the people. National structures can guarantee the common good if they have the people’s approval. And at the international level, consideration should be given to the capacity of the Nigerian people to be responsible and self-governing. International structures should not impose on people foreign decisions without examining the context.
Bibliography
- Gula, Richard M. Reason Informed by Faith: Foundations of Catholic Morality. New York: Paulist Press, 1989.
- John Paul II. Veritatis Splendor. 6 August 1993. Encyclicals. 8 December 2004 http://www.vatican.va/edocs/ENG0222/__P6.HTM.
- The New American Bible. Catholic World Press. 1991.
- Wolfe, Gudorf, Ethics and World Religions: Cross-Cultural Case Studies, Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1999.
[1] Mt.5: 48
[2] Richard M. Gula, S.S., Reason Informed by Faith. Foundations of Catholic Morality, p.44
[3] Gen. 1, 26-27
[4] Gula, p.63
[5] Gula, p. 63-74
[6] Gula, p.64
[7] Gula, p.65
[8] Gula, p. 77
[9] Gula, p.79
[10] Gula, P301-305
[11] Gula, p.283
[12] Gula, p.286-297
[13] P.290-297
[14] Wolfe & Gudorf. Ethics and World Religions: Cross-Cultural Case Studies. p. 202-205
[15] Wolfe & Gudorf, P. 202-205
[16] Wolfe & Gudorf, P. 212
No comments:
Post a Comment