The Catholic times. [volume] (Columbus, Ohio) 1951-current, 1954-09-10
Just Among Ourselves
Passing Comment censidsred or Incchsiderafs

Every now and then,-ih this busy enlightened,
war-ridden, scientific, bewildered, education-mad,
stomharred, weary, and wistful world,-Some old
mossback or person incautious about social taboos,
will utter the word morality. OF course, everyone
who has university degree and reads the comics
knows that the old word has new meaning, and
that morals are now T0reS-or tribal prejudiceS
and inherited customs He also understands that it is
better not to mention the words morality and morals
at ALL For these words unpeasing to the egoism
of dons they are words Uerboten among and by the
stsunch defenders of liberty and academic freedom.
And yet the champions of observation-disclosures
is the lads who wish everyone to be free to think
he pleases regardless of fact long he thinks
within the very grooves approved by the free
thnkers--have themselves some notion of morality
and of morals distinct from mere Dpores. Let a
thief take off with their vauables let confidence
man sell them bogus stock let scandalmonger
ruin their good name and they will howl to high
heaven for justice. That is, they will appeal to
real morality. They will not consider the activities
of thief man, calumniator, to be the
mere expression of tribal prejudice or inherited
custom; will they interpret their attitude
towards the evil'doers in such terms.
Modern men, especially the ones that fancy
themselves thinkers philosophers, often
busily engaged in getting out limb, Intellectually
speaking and then working like mad to saw off
the limb between themselves and the trunk of
the tree. For instance there is noted professor,
now happily retired,-who taught and wrote that
"the substantive ego' is myth; that is he believed
and taught that there is nothing substantially per-
manent about human being, and that, just as the
body is constantly wearing out and building itself
up that it undergoes complete replacement ev
cry seven years So there is no permanence IN
the soul-if there is soul--to justify person in
considering himself the same being he seven
years ago Yet this professor drew his salary for
than twenty years in one institution. II
occurred to him that after his first seven years of
teaching he should have renewed his contract with
the universt" H never thought that he was doing
wrong in collecting the wages that belonged by
contract to another fellow who had gradually
out and disappeared
Ii is one of the easiest of things to swim off into
Of theory, indulging fancy, and, if possible,
selling its silly fictons to admirng pupils as scien
hfc facts. Meanwhile, the realities of daily life
make nonsense of the theory. But the theorist is
moronicaily unaware of the fact and goes on day
after day, teaching one thing and practising lis
exact opposite. II is so, have briefly noticed,
in the point of morality and morals.
The editor of one of our sckest and simiest
magazines was once nettled by complaints about
the immoral character of the pictures he was pub
lishng,-this was back in June, 1936,-and he
grasped the editorial pen to make this sapient state
ment Morality consists in living the kind of life
others" Even by that faulty definition the editor
stood condemned for the complaint was that he tDds
damaging the lives of others by putting lewd pie
lures before their eyes, and, presumably. evil
thoughts in their minds, evil desires in their wills
and surgng tumeseence into their animal tenden-
cies
But moraliy,-whch does exist despite the
pinchbeck dons who smile I'm the shape of a cap
tal V" when the word is mentioned,-is not de-
fined as living the kind of life you want to live 1t
living the kind of life you ought TO live II
making your life.--in thought, word, deed
desire, omssion,-conlorm to the norm measure
of what it ought to be. And of what that norm of
measure is, we shall speak in moment. But first
contrast the notion of morality (Which is acknowl
edged by all TO something fine ideal
when II is reduced to mores) with the notion
of some other ideal, say patriotism. What would
the editor, who readily whipped out his defn-
tion of morality think of an American who should
define patriotism as consisting in being the
kind of citizen he feels like being?
The norm of what human life should be is
as common sense would expect,-the will and pur-
pose of Him who creates human life That is, the
norm of morality is the infinite understanding and
infinite will of God. II is the Divine Reason And
the old name for the Divine Reason 0hat is, the
of God Himself creating for wise purpoSel
is the Eternal Law.
Now. a law must be brought into contact with
what il directs; otherwise it has force at all
Just 50, rope around bundle Of logs cannot hold
them together till il Is frightened about them And
a law, which directs human beings, is brought into
contact with them by knowledge. Until is
aware of law, until he knows that il exists and
lays obligation upon him, he simply cannot con-
sciousy conform his conduct to its requirements
We read that Ignorance OF the law excuses no
one" but this axiom has reference only to human
laws and their outward observance; il is practical
dictum based on the fact that men can deceive
another, that they can lie: that they plead
ignorance when they not ignorant But
before God person truly and blameleSsly ignorant
of requirement cannot be held responsible for
failing to meet it. Now, the Eternal Law like every
laws must be made known TO those whom it binds.
Since the Eternal Law binds every man who has
passed out of infancy into the state of personal
sponsbility for his conduct il must be law know
able to every normal man by his very nature. At
an early age, human being becomes aware of an
order in things which he must preserve and not
destroy. He becomes aware of mine and thine, and
sees evil in theft murder, In word he is aware
that there is Sueh thino axsuood which must do