Not exact matches
Accordingly, the remainder of this essay will proceed as follows: I will first seek to show that the meta - ethical character of every claim to
moral validity includes a
principle of social action by which a
universal community of rights is constituted, so that no
moral theory can be valid if it is inconsistent
with these rights.
An affirmative answer to this question takes issue
with moral thinkers such as Gewirth, who fully agree that
universal moral principles can not be exhausted by the formative rights I have identified but also hold that the supreme substantive
principle is nonteleological.
Their chief focus is on helping people develop a personal and saving relationship to Jesus Christ and to live in peace
with their neighbors by cultivating an obedience to
universal principles of
moral law.
Instead, he is concerned
with the «real people involved and their suffering» and considers it a terrible
moral failure to hide behind a ««
universal»
principle applied... to everyone.»
Instead, however, and as the best substitute, the Church would need to give the individual Christian three things: a more living ardour of Christian inspiration as a basis of individual life; an absolute conviction that the
moral responsibility of the individual is not at an end because he does not come in conflict
with any concrete instruction of the official Church; an initiation into the holy art of finding the concrete prescription for his own decision in the personal call of God, in other words, the logic of concrete particular decision which of course does justice to
universal regulative
principles but can not wholly be deduced from them solely by explicit casuistry.
There would be questions of systematic theology, for example those concerning the nature of justification, the validity, and knowledge, of the natural law within Christian morality, the possibility and recognition of an individual call coming directly from God to the conscience in a concrete situation, and the question of the relation of such: a call to
universal moral principles, as well as many other questions
with which the ecumenical dialogue will have to concern itself.
The second point is to draw on an analogy
with language and ask whether there might be something like a
universal moral grammar, a set of
principles that every human is born
with.