Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T18:18:43.092Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Josef Fuchs' Revised Natural Law: Possibilities for Social Ethics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

James P. O'Sullivan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In the second half of the twentieth century Josef Fuchs put forward a major re-visioning of the natural law, but this re-visioning did not include a robust social ethic. In this paper the author first undertakes an explication of the development, context, and major features of Fuchs’ theory. Next, in order to locate it within other twentieth century developments in natural law theory, Fuchs’ theory is related to Jacques Maritain's re-visioning of natural law, with its clear social-ethical implications. Finally, the author draws out some of the potential implications and applications of Fuchs’ revised natural law for social ethics.

Keywords

Josef FuchsNatural LawHumanae VitaeJacques MaritainMoral Theology
Type
Original Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 95 , Issue 1058 , July 2014 , pp. 379 - 396
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 The Dominican Council

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Graham, Mark, Josef Fuchs on Natural Law (Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 2002), p. 112Google Scholar.

2 I will rely primarily on Chapter 3 of Graham's Fuchs on the Natural Law, pp. 83–110 to give a brief overview of the relevant factors in this conversion. This shift has also been discussed in other works. See especially, Keenan, James F., A History of Catholic Moral Theology In the Twentieth Century: From Confessing Sins to Liberating Consciences, (New York: Continuum, 2010), pp. 120–126Google Scholar, and “Josef Fuchs and the Question of Moral Objectivity in Roman Catholic Reasoning,” Religious Studies Review 24 (1998)Google Scholar; Mercier, Ronald Amos, “What is Nature? The Development of Josef Fuchs’ Thought on Moral Normativity,” (PhD. Diss., Regis College, 1993)Google Scholar; O'Connell, Timothy E., “Changing Roman Catholic Moral Theology: A Study in Josef Fuchs,” (PhD. Diss., Fordham University, 1974)Google Scholar.

3 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 128.

4 The Majority Report on “Responsible Parenthood,” in McClory, Robert, Turning Point (New York: Crossroad, 1995), pp. 171–187Google Scholar.

5 Kaiser, Robert, The Politics of Sex and Religion: A Case History in the Development of Doctrine 1962–1984 (Kansas City, MO: Leaven Press, 1985), p. 154Google Scholar.

6 Keenan, History of Catholic Moral Theology, 121; “Vatican II and Theological Ethics,” Theological Studies 74 (2013), pp. 162–190.

7 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 128

8 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 113.

9 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 137.

10 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 117.

11 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, p. 56.

12 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 124.

13 Keenan, History, p. 187.

14 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 123; Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, p. 55.

15 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 124.

16 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p.124.

17 Fuchs, , Christian Ethics in a Secular Arena, translated by Hoose, Bernard and McNeil, Brian, (Washington D.C: Georgetown University Press, 1984), p. 119Google Scholar.

18 Fuchs, , Human Values and Christian Morality, translated by Heelan, M.H., et al., (Dublin, Gill and Macmillan, 1971), p. 117Google Scholar.

19 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 128.

20 Fuchs, , Natural Law: A Theological Investigation, translated by Reckter, Helmut and Dowling, John A., (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1965), pp. 86–101Google Scholar.

21 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 131.

22 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 123.

23 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 129; Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, pp. 126–7.

24 Traina, , Feminist Ethics and Natural Law (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1999), p. 183Google Scholar.

25 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 183.

26 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 125.

27 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 128.

28 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 148.

29 Fuchs, Human Values, p. 143.

30 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, p. 127 and Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 149.

31 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 153.

32 Fuchs, , Moral Demands and Personal Obligations, translated by McNeil, Brian (Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, 1993) p. 114Google Scholar.

33 Fuchs, Christian Ethics, p. 148. Graham argues further that it is not entirely clear to whom Fuchs refers when he speaks of “the individual missions” that pertain to persons outside the magisterium, but that at the very least he does not consider the Holy Spirit's aid to be confined exclusively to the magisterium (160–1).

34 Graham, Josef Fuchs, pp. 162–163.

35 Graham, Josef Fuchs, pp. 164–5.

36 Fuchs, Moral Demands, 142, quoted in Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 163.

37 Graham notes that Fuchs distinguishes moral matters connected to the “deposit of faith” and those that are not and so are not matters on which the magisterium has any special competency; few (if any) moral matters are of the former sort, and so most official teaching deals with non-revealed moral truths, on which the magisterium has not no special competence. pp. 160–1.

38 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, pp. 140.

39 Keenan, History, p. 153.

40 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, p. 141.

41 Fuchs, Christian Ethics, p. 46.

42 Fuchs, Christian Ethics, p. 45.

43 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 187.

44 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, pp. 197–8.

45 Keenan, History, p. 154.

46 Keenan, History, p. 155.

47 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 171.

48 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, p. 70.

49 Gula, Richard, Reason Informed By Faith, (Mahwah, NJ: Paulist,1989), pp. 235–236Google Scholar.

50 Gula, Reason Informed By Faith, pp. 242–6. Gula draws on Timothy E. O'Connell's characteristics of contemporary natural law: real, experiential, historical, and proportional, and adds ‘personal.’ See O'Connell, , Principles for a Catholic Morality (New York: Seabury Press, 1978), pp. 144–154Google Scholar.

51 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 188.

52 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 195. Emphasis original.

53 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 195.

54 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 188.

55 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 185.

56 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 185.

57 Fuchs, Christian Morality, pp. 114–115.

58 Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 185.

59 Maritain, , Man and the State, (Chicago, University of Chicago, 1951), p. 88Google Scholar. Emphasis original.

60 Maritain, Man and the State, p. 88. Emphasis original.

61 Maritain, Man and the State, p. 89.

62 Maritain, Man and the State, p. 90.

63 Stiltner, Brian, Religion and the Common Good (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 1999), p. 116Google Scholar.

64 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 135.

65 Fuchs, Personal Responsibility, p. 99.

66 Fuchs, Human Values, p. 184, quoted in Traina, Feminist Ethics, p. 182.

67 See Nussbaum, Martha, Creating Capabilities (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Harvard, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68 Fuchs, Christian Ethics in a Secular Arena, p. 124.

69 Graham, Josef Fuchs, pp. 130–131.

70 Traina points out that for Fuchs it is sinful simply to accept a majority position uncritically. See pp.185 and 199, n.86.

71 Benedict XVI, Caristas in Veritate available at: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html, no. 21.

72 Traina, Feminist Ethics, pp. 185 and 199 n.87; and see Fuchs, Human Values, pp. 200–3.

73 Traina, Feminist Ethics, pp. 185.

74 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 250.

75 Graham, Josef Fuchs, p. 251.

76 Charles Curran, “Official Catholic Social and Sexual Teachings: A Methodological Comparison,” Readings In Moral Theology No. 8, pp. 555–56.

77 Deberri, Edward and Hug, James E., Catholic Social Teaching, Our Best Kept Secret (Maryknoll, N.Y.: Orbis, 2003), p. 131Google Scholar.