Rev José Mario O Mandía
jmom.honlam.org
We have seen that the goodness or evil of an act is based on the act itself (finis operis), the intention of the doer (finis operantis), and the circumstances surrounding it.
Life, however, is complex. Our acts can give rise to other good or bad effects, some of which may be unintended. Many of our actions have multiple consequences. What criteria should we follow to judge such cases?
Authors vary in the way they explain the criteria, but we can use the following principles when judging these actions.
(1) First is to remember that an act can only be good if the (direct) object of the act, the intention of the person acting and the circumstances is good. If the act itself is not good, then no good effect can turn it into good.
(2) Secondly, the evil effect can either be foreseeable or not, and may be avoidable or not.
(2a) If it is not foreseeable, the person may be absolved of some or full responsibility.
(2b) If it is foreseeable but can be avoided, obviously one must do everything to avoid it, otherwise he is to blame for the evil effect. For example, a person goes on a weekend trip and does not plan out when and where to go for Sunday Mass. Going on a trip in itself is good, but because one has a grave obligation to worship God on Sunday (which is basically giving back to God 1 hour out of the 168 hours that He gives us each week), he has to make sure that he will not miss this obligation (unless he gets sick during the trip). If he goes without arranging for his Sunday Mass, his action is still sinful: it is an indirectly-willed action, a voluntary “in causa” action.
(2c) If the evil effect is foreseeable but cannot be avoided, one must not directly will the evil effect (this logically follows from the first principle, that the action itself is good), but only tolerate or permit it.
(3) Thirdly, if one foresees that an action that has an evil effect and one cannot avoid it from happening or is obliged to do it (the case in 2c above), he must have a proportionately serious reason or cause for going ahead with the action. One should consider the following:
(3a) the seriousness of the indirectly caused evil — one should not act if the evil caused is greater than the good obtained by the act;
(3b) the closeness of the influence of his action on the evil effect;
(3c) the probability that the evil effect will happen;
(3d) the obligation of the person to prevent the evil effect (because of his position or responsibility).
Let us give a few more examples.
A dying patient may be given a strong painkiller to ease his pain (good finis operis), even if it will shorten his life (evil indirect effect). But he cannot be given a stronger, lethal dose of the same drug in order to cause his death (evil finis operis) and cut short his agony (good indirect effect).
A woman may undergo a necessary surgical operation (good finis operis) that might lead to sterility (indirect effect). But one cannot be sterilized (evil finis operis) to avoid serious complications or even death arising from a possible future pregnancy (good indirect effect).
One can go into a risky investment in order to save a faltering business (good finis operis), even if there is danger of harming it further (evil indirect effect). But one cannot falsely declare that the business is bankrupt (evil finis operis), even if it is sure to save the company (good indirect effect).
Follow
