| (cont.)
I. The Consistent Ethic of Life: An Overview
The idea of the consistent
ethic is both old and new. It is "old" in the sense
that its substance has been the basis of many programs
for years. For example, when the U.S. bishops inaugurated
their Respect Life Program in 1972, they invited the
Catholic community to focus on the "sanctity of human
life and the many threats to human life in the modern
world, including war, violence, hunger, and poverty."
Fourteen years later,
the focus remains the same. As the 1986 Respect Life
brochure states, "The Pastoral Plan is set in the
context of a consistent ethic that links concern for
the unborn with concern for all human life. The inviolability
of innocent human life is a fundamental norm."
Moreover, the bishops'
pastoral letter, "The Challenge of Peace: God's Promise
and Our Response," emphasized the sacredness of human
life and the responsibility we have, personally and
as a society, to protect and preserve its sanctity.
In paragraph 285, it specifically linked the nuclear
question with abortion and other life issues:
When
we accept violence in any form as commonplace, our
sensitivities become dulled. When we accept violence,
war itself can be taken for granted. Violence has
many faces: oppression of the poor, deprivation
of basic human rights, economic exploitation, sexual
exploitation and pornography, neglect or abuse of
the aged and the helpless, and innumerable other
acts of inhumanity. Abortion in particular blunts
a sense of the sacredness of human life. In a society
where the innocent unborn are killed wantonly, how
can we expect people to feel righteous revulsion
at the act or threat of killing non-combatants in
war?
However, the pastoral letter—while
giving us a starting point for developing a consistent
ethic of life—does not provide a fully articulated
framework.
It was precisely to
provide a more comprehensive theological and ethical
basis for the Respect Life Program and for the linkage
of war and abortion, as noted by the pastoral letter,
that I developed the theme of the consistent ethic.
Another important circumstance which prompted me to
move in this direction was that I had just been asked
to serve as Chairman of the Bishops' Pro-Life Committee.
It was October of 1983, and I knew that both abortion
and defense-related issues would undoubtedly play
an important role in the upcoming presidential campaign.
It was urgent, I felt,
that a well-developed theological and ethical framework
be provided which would link the various life issues
while, at the same time, pointing out that the issues
are not all the same. It was my fear that, without
such a framework or vision, the U.S. bishops would
be severely pressured by those who wanted to push
a particular issue with little or no concern for the
rest. With such a theological basis, we would be able
to argue convincingly on behalf of all the issues
on which we had taken a position in recent years.
I first presented the
theme in a talk at Fordham University in December,
1983. At that time, I called for a public discussion
of the concept, both in Catholic circles and the broader
community. In all candor I must admit that the public
response greatly exceeded my hopes and expectations.
Since that time there
has been a lively exchange by both those who agree
and disagree with the theme and its implications.
By far, the majority of the reactions have been supportive.
Nonetheless, it has been used and misused by those
who have tried to push their own, narrower agendas.
I myself have made further contributions to the discussion
through subsequent talks and articles.
The concept itself is
a challenging one. It requires us to broaden, substantively
and creatively, our ways of thinking, our attitudes,
our pastoral response. Many are not accustomed to
thinking about all the life-threatening and life-diminishing
issues with such consistency. The result is that they
remain somewhat selective in their response. Although
some of those who oppose the concept seem not to have
understood it, I sometimes suspect that many who oppose
it recognize its challenge. Quite frankly, I sometimes
wonder whether those who embrace it quickly and whole-heartedly
truly understand its implicit challenge.
Last November, when
the U.S. bishops updated and reaffirmed the Pastoral
Plan for Pro-Life Activities, they explicitly adopted
the "consistent ethic" for the first time as the theological
context for the Plan.
In sum, to the delight
of those who agree with its theological reasoning
and to the dismay of the small minority who do not,
the "consistent ethic" has entered into our theological
vocabulary.
Let me now explain in
greater depth the theological basis and strategic
value of the "consistent ethic." Catholic teaching
is based on two truths about the human person: human
life is both sacred and social. Because we esteem
human life as sacred, we have a duty to protect and
foster it at all stages of development, from conception
to natural death, and in all circumstances. Because
we acknowledge that human life is also social, society
must protect and foster it.
Precisely because life
is sacred, the taking of even one life is a momentous
event. Traditional Catholic teaching has allowed the
taking of human life in particular situations by way
of exception—for example, in self-defense and capital
punishment. In recent decades, however, the presumptions
against taking human life have been strengthened and
the exceptions made ever more restrictive.
Fundamental to these
shifts in emphasis is a more acute perception of the
many ways in which life is threatened today. Obviously,
such questions as war, aggression, and capital punishment
are not new; they have been with us for centuries.
Life has always been threatened, but today there is
a new context that shapes the content of our ethic
of life.
The principal factor
responsible for this new context is modern technology
which induces a sharper awareness of the fragility
of human life. War, for example, has always been a
threat to life, but today the threat is qualitatively
different because of nuclear and other sophisticated
kinds of weapons. The weapons produced by modern technology
now threaten life on a scale previously unimaginable.
Living, as we do, therefore, in an age of extraordinary
technological development means we face a qualitatively
new range of moral problems. The essential questions
we face are these: In an age when we can do almost
anything, how do we decide what we should do? In a
time when we can do anything technologically, how
do we decide morally what we should not do?
We face new technological
challenges along the whole spectrum of life from conception
to natural death. This creates the need for a consistent
ethic, for the spectrum cuts across such issues as
genetics, abortion, capital punishment, modern warfare,
and the care of the terminally ill. Admittedly, these
are all distinct problems, enormously complex, and
deserve individual treatment. Each requires its own
moral analysis. No single answer or solution applies
to all. But they are linked!
Given this broad range
of challenging issues, we desperately need a societal
attitude or climate that will sustain a consistent
defense and promotion of life. When human life is
considered "cheap" or easily expendable in one area,
eventually nothing is held as sacred and all lives
are in jeopardy. Ultimately, it is society's attitude
about life—whether of respect or non-respect—that
determines its policies and practices.
The theological foundation
of the consistent ethic, then, is defense of the person.
The ethic grows out of the very character of Catholic
moral thought. I do not mean to imply, of course,
that one has to be a Catholic to affirm the moral
content of the consistent ethic. But I do think that
this theme highlights both the systematic and analogical
character of Catholic moral theology.
The systematic nature
of Catholic theology means it is grounded in a set
of basic principles and then articulated in a fashion
which draws out the meaning of each principle and
the relationships among them. Precisely because of
its systematic quality, Catholic theology refuses
to treat moral issues in an ad hoc fashion. There
is a continual process of testing the use of a principle
in one case by its use in very different circumstances.
The consistent ethic seeks only to illustrate how
this testing goes on when dealing with issues involving
the taking of life or the enhancement of life through
social policy.
The analogical character
of Catholic thought offers the potential to address
a spectrum of issues which are not identical but have
some common characteristics. Analogical reasoning
identifies the unifying elements which link two or
more issues, while at the same time recognizing why
similar issues cannot be reduced to a single problem.
The taking of life presents
itself as a moral problem all along the spectrum of
life, but there are differences between abortion and
war, just as there are elements that radically differentiate
war from decisions made about the care of a terminally
ill patient. The differences among these cases are
universally acknowledged. A consistent ethic seeks
to highlight the fact that differences do not destroy
the elements of a common moral challenge.
A Catholic ethic which
is both systematic in its argument and analogical
in its perspective stands behind the proposal that,
in the face of the multiple threats to life in our
time, spanning every phase of existence, it is necessary
to develop a moral vision which can address these
several challenges in a coherent and comprehensive
fashion.
The theological assertion
that the human person is made in the image and likeness
of God, the philosophical affirmation of the dignity
of the person, and the political principle that society
and state exist to serve the person—all these themes
stand behind the consistent ethic. They also sustain
the positions that the U.S. Catholic bishops have
taken on issues as diverse as nuclear policy, social
policy, and abortion. These themes provide the basis
for the moral perspective of the consistent ethic.
Page 1 - 2 - 3
- 4
|
