Dwyer argues that there are only two ways to resolve the ambiguities of determining right and wrong based on feelings: 1) we must agree that some actions are inherently worthy or unworthy regardless of our opinions, or 2) we have no coherent arguments against atrocities like the Holocaust. The document also discusses how morality cannot be relative, as that would mean we could not consistently call any actions wrong or make ethical judgments as a group.

1. REVIEW John Dwyer’s Conclusion “ The multiple ambiguities of ‘doing what we feel is right’ can be resolved in only two ways: either we agree that there are ways of acting which, in and of themselves, are worthy of being chosen (and others which are unworthy), whether we admit it, like it, or even know it, or we must admit that in finding fault with Auschwitz (which stands here for all of the inhumanity human beings have been inflicting on each other from the beginning), we have no coherent arguments at our disposal.” [XP, p. 5]

2. REVIEW If morality is relative… It would mean we cannot consistently say even very horrible actions are wrong (Dwyer’s “Auschwitz Principle”). It would mean that we couldn’t intelligibly use the words “good” and “bad,” “right” and “wrong” in a public setting, because everyone could legitimately mean different things by these terms. Therefore, it would mean that we cannot do ethics as a group because it would be foolish to raise questions of right or wrong if we can’t hope to be right or wrong about them! And it would mean that we’d be contradicting ourselves if we ever said we shouldn’t judge or criticize another’s morality out of a respect for tolerance or diversity.

3. God, Good, & Purpose Good and Purpose Theology & Ethics come together Theology tells you the purpose of life Ethics tells you how to live to attain it JP II on the “final end,” “purpose of life,” “definitive goal,” “ultimate end” Adding Jesus Ralph Waldo Emerson: “What we are worshipping we are becoming.”

4. Rabbi Kushner “ The affirmation of monotheism … is a moral statement….” (XP, p. 10) “ The assertion that there is only one God is the assertion that issues of moral behavior are not matters of personal taste.”

5. The Purpose of Life “ All people comprise a single community and have a single origin—God. One also is their final goal—God.” (Nostra Aetate, §1) Good Bad GOD Jesus

6. REVIEW Putting it all together… “ Good” is defined in terms of purpose or ultimate destination God would be that ultimate destination from within a Christian worldview That ultimate destination or goal or end that God is would be known through Jesus, who is known through revelation So, imitation of Jesus, following his teachings & example fills in what the purpose of life is But, how do we fill in what it means to imitate Jesus for different moral issues?

7. Sources of Catholic Christian Ethics: I. Scripture and Christian Ethics A. “starting point of Christian Ethics” (XP, p. 16) B. Limitations of Scripture? II. Natural Law A. What the natural law is B. Limitations of Natural Law? III. Tradition A. Role of bishops and pope B. Limitations of Tradition? IV. Experience A. Bishop Untener’s map analogy B. Limitations of Experience?

8. A Partial Catholic Organizational Chart Bishops (teaching is “one of the principal duties of bishops”) *Magisterium = the teaching authority of the Catholic Church Pope (“the Supreme Teacher of all the faithful”) Magisterium*

9. The Do-Right Rule “ The greatest power God gives us is the power to choose…. Do what’s right and avoid what’s wrong, and if you have any doubt about it, get out the Bible.”

10. Recap (Where we’ve come so far) From Ethics to God From God to Jesus From Jesus to Scripture From Scripture to Church = Catholic Christian Ethics