Morality is what you do when nobody is looking
Key to a properly ordered society
Occasionally, I post articles that attempt to use historically important intellectual developments as keys to explain the dysfunctions and injustices of modern society. This is one of the those. It is not for everyone but, it is relatively short and worthy of consideration.
“Morality is what you do when nobody is looking” is a truism, purportedly stated by Aldo Leopold as follows: “Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching.”1 From a practical perspective, this might be understood as “doing the right thing for the right reason.”
The scholastic moral philosophers2 and theologians, (incorporating the teaching of Aristotle3), taught that we should never do the right thing for the wrong reason or the wrong thing for the right reason4 (the wrong thing for the wrong reason is obviously immoral). Of the four possibilities, only the first, doing the right thing for the right reason, is morally licit (acceptable). Most of the problems in contemporary society reduce to the widespread abuse of this moral principle.
A related issue, is that over the past several hundred years due to the increasing influence of Modernists (there is no God, for example, see the history of the Bavarian Illuminati and the writings of Albert Pike that effectively displace the Christian triune God with Lucifer/Satan5) and the post-Modernists (there is no truth), disagreement exists about what constitutes right and wrong behavior (moral acts). This is part of the moral inversion that began as early as the 1700’s. It became much more aggressively promulgated in the 1960’s (even to the extent of debasing the long-held precepts of the universal Church) and has resulted today in a complete inversion from traditional moral norms. What the Modernists envisioned in theory, has now become reality, to the great detriment of everyone.
What hope is there for a society that cannot even agree on what is right and wrong? Such a situation is untenable. Without an overarching moral code that is accepted by all but the criminal/morally bankrupt among us, there is no hope of living in a properly ordered6 and peaceful society. With complete moral relativity, right and wrong become arbitrary, capricious and eventually a matter of “might makes right”, which those in power, freely wield against the masses7.
Two of the most disturbing hallmarks of our age are that 1) people disagree about what is right and wrong and 2) they disagree on whether truth (understood as a reality that exists independent of the knower and thus is universal and [not relative]), is absolute or relative and for others, whether truth is even knowable.8 Human beings in virtually any other age would find these notions completely ludicrous.
When we consider that the fundamental underlying principles that should help govern society are undermined, it is easier to comprehend why we experience so much distress/tribulation. Those who [own and rule the world']9, have benefited from this situation, in part, because they do not have to account for their behavior. There is no [moral imperative]10 that stands as a corrective11 for their actions.
The detailed footnotes are included for the benefit of readers who wish to plumb the depths of this topic in more detail. They are strongly encouraged.
The point here is that in times past, people were concerned about what others would think of them if they violated the prevailing moral precepts but might be inclined to break them if they thought no one would become aware. The adage urges us to obey the same prescriptions whether in public or private. This of course, is the teaching of the Gospel of Christ which takes the principle even further by teaching that we are not even allowed to think about that which it is morally. impermissible to do. The sermon on the Mount makes this explicit as do other relevant passages.
Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas for example. In the Middle Ages, a synthesis between Aristotelian ethics and Christian theology was developed which was begun by Albertus Magnus and was more fully formed by Thomas Aquinas (Aristotelian/Thomistic synthesis) after which it became much more widespread and embraced.
See Aristotle (1999). Nicomachean Ethics. Translated by Irwin, Terence. Hackett Publishing Company. ISBN 0-87220-464-2.
This is what was referred to in the epistle of Saint Paul to the Romans, And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just, Romans 3:8. We see this very frequently in modern society. People are encouraged to do things that are objectively evil for some theoretical good reason/intent as if in doing so, the evil action itself can be ignored in the service of a perceived good. Wrong actions (intrinsically evil) can never be justified for what we might think are good reasons/intentions,
Lucifer was the highest of the angels created by God but because of waging an insurrection along with roughly 1/3 of the angelic hosts, was evicted from heaven. The point is that Lucifer/Satan is a created being and thus unworthy of being worshipped. See Isaiah 14:12, Ezekiel 28:16 and Revelation 12:7-9.
For an excellent treatment on this topic, see: The Kingship of Christ and Organized Naturalism by Rev. Denis Fahey, first published, June 1943.
Consider the horrendous events of the past five years for example.
This reflects a drastic confusion/misunderstanding of metaphysics at the level of worldview. Three basic elements are found in every worldview or cosmology, a theory of truth, a theory of right and wrong (moral code) and a theory of reality. Since the 1700’s, the foundational Christian teachings on truth and morality have been adulterated. In the 21st century, the nature of reality itself has been altered. It should be unnecessary to mention that this clearly of Satanic origin.
Often referred to as globalists or illuminati, a hallmark of which is being members of various secret societies such as the Freemasons who, at the top ranks of their membership, worship Lucifer.
This term is used not in the specific Kantian sense but in the more general one. Such a moral imperative should, in a properly functioning society, help govern what the powerful feel free to do and what they feel compelled not to do. Clearly this is totally lacking today.
For the globalists/illuminati, it is as if no one is ever looking at the morality of what they do.
You beautifully describe most (there are still some good ones but a worryingly small cohort) politicians who have no moral compass or indeed a conscience.