by David White
“…a good life is indeed a work of art. But it is obvious that the art of ethics must be practiced by each person for himself, as the shaper of his destiny and the sculptor of his soul.” So writes Fr. Austin Fagothey in his highly regarded textbook Right and Reason. The last century’s rebellion against Church Morality has been so thorough I daresay we are three solid generations into having forgotten what was being rebelled against in the first place. Moral decency today is as mysterious as it is maligned. How refreshing, then, to come across a book that lays out the traditional view of right and wrong, and does so with respect.
What drew me to Fagothey’s book was a rhetorical question printed on the back cover: why is right right, and wrong wrong? Every normal person innately senses the ethical nature of a given situation, but few can articulate it, even to themselves. I was but a few pages into the book, and the moral focus began to sharpen for each situation, issue, or event I brought to mind. Before long, I was thinking more than I was reading.
For instance, “Christian” morality is a misnomer, because the distinction of right from wrong necessarily stands apart from revealed religion. (It stands to reason, for we expect a primitive tribesman at least to behave himself.) Morality is universal, yet it’s surprising how few educated people understand that. What would we say of a religion (or religious understanding) that purports to justify within itself such acts as the 9/11 attacks? I don’t know anyone who condones what happened, but I’ve spoken to several who believe the terrorists acted out of stolid religious conviction. But if morality is universal, their religion does not determine it, so that conviction is necessarily false. This gives me a definite reason to justify what I felt to be the case, and to deny the terrorists even the courage of their convictions.
Continuing on this thread: what of the argument that the attacks were military in nature, and so on and so forth? What to think of that? It would of course depend upon the specifics, but I would advise any interested party to thoroughly ground himself in the basic principles set out in the early chapters of Right and Reason, then see how Fr. Fagothey applies them in his chapter on war. That done, there’s no assurance we’d be in total agreement. Fr. Fagothey didn’t write a how-to book; his seeks to promote clarity of thought in moral judgments.
The legendary physicist Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar (1910-1995) once said of his research interests that he studies something until he acquires a “point of view” (about it). Then he moves on to something else. The remark is memorable because he takes an ordinary phrase, “point of view,” and gives it extraordinary depth. For me, the great value of Fr. Fagothey’s book is that it enables the sagacious reader to acquire a “point of view”—in the sense of Chandrasekhar—in matters of right and wrong.
Fagothey doesn’t present the traditional school in isolation. He considers, one-by-one, the arguments of the important modern schools, as they pertain to the problem at hand. He doesn’t set them up as straw men either (he has a favorable view of Immanuel Kant), but he does hold them accountable to the same standard: reason (hence the title). He demonstrates how the traditional view prevails when all are judged according to reason (logic)—as opposed to theology, ideology, or social cause. It is the Church’s strong tradition of intellectual substance that elevates the Roman Catholic view (on social issues) over the feminist view, the leftist view, the Hollywood music-industry view, etc.
Fr. Austin Fagothey was an institution at the University of Santa Clara. What began as a textbook for his students became a classic of clarity and precision. He quotes at length from his primary sources, Aristotle and St. Thomas Aquinas. He even recapitulates the argument of each chapter in syllogisms — the style of the Medieval Scholar. If you want a taste of the sort of intellection that built Western Civilization, you’ll find it in Right and Reason. In its seventh edition, it has undergone the usual metamorphoses of updates and editorial revisions, like all successful textbooks. Fortunately for us, the venerable second edition of 1959 is back in print, from TAN Books. Ninety years ago, when Londoners feared that modern technology was causing life to move too quickly, and events were spinning out of control, Gilbert K. Chesterton said not to fear. “Let man take care of his philosophy, and civilization will take care of itself.” In Right and Reason, Fr. Fagothey proves himself a worthy caretaker.
David White is a chemical engineer for CPC Corporation. In addition to his advanced work in the chemistry, he has been a long-time student of great western literature and mathematics.
