The Roman Catholic Church teaches that human life is sacred. Explain how this teaching influences its attitude to abortion and euthanasia, showing that you understand other points of view.
ABORTION AND EUTHANASIA
. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that human life is sacred. Explain how this teaching influences its attitude to abortion and euthanasia, showing that you understand other points of view.
First I will start with definitions of three key words in the question. These three words are abortion, sacred and euthanasia. The type of abortion I will talk about in this coursework is procured abortion. Abortion is the termination of the life of a foetus; procured abortion is the termination of the foetus with outside help. The word sacred means, consecrated, blessed by god, given by god, therefore most holy (hallowed). In terms of human life, it means, human life is precious because it is a gift from god. Euthanasia means 'easy death' without severe suffering, today the word is used to mean 'mercy killing' because it puts an end to extreme suffering, it prevents abnormal babies growing up, it ends the life of the mentally ill and it can prevent the incurable from having a miserable life. There are two types of euthanasia that I should be aware of. There is voluntary euthanasia and non - voluntary euthanasia. Voluntary euthanasia is where a person with a painful terminal disease who, unable to do anything for themselves, asks someone else to kill them painlessly, for example, the doctor gives them a lethal dose of painkillers. Non - Voluntary is where a person is not kept alive because they are regarded as having a worse life than death, but cannot make any decisions for themselves.
The meaning of abortion and euthanasia are quiet clear from their definitions. As far as different views are concerned mostly all groups of Christianity are against the concept of abortion, there are humanitarian groups, which are in favour of it, they have their own views that are totally different then the religious views. Although the catholic church does teach abortion and euthanasia wrong, full stop, not all people in the catholic church believe this and may feel there are special exceptions, for example if someone has been raped and got pregnant, it may be excepted by some people in the church to have an abortion. There are varied views of people as a society for both abortion and euthanasia.
The Roman Catholic Church teaches strictly that both abortion and euthanasia are wrong. What the church may say to someone may be different to what the church teaches. Some of the priests may allow abortion or euthanasia in certain cases. Almost all the priests would offer guidance and help the person, most would sympathise and say how bad what they're going through is, but the church strictly teaches abortion and euthanasia to be wrong. Some of the reasons the catholic church give for abortion being wrong are, since the first century, when the church first began, the church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This early teaching has not changed and probably wont, the church sees this teaching as a tradition, the church believes that life begins at conception, so having an abortion is in theory killing a human or in other words, murder. The catholic trust society gives their reason for opposing abortion as:
'We have been created by the almighty God in his own image and likeness. No pregnancy is unplanned because no baby can be conceived unless almighty God intends that conception and has willed that particular unique and completely individual new person into existence. What has actually happened in our society is that clever arguments has convinced those with no anchor of belief in God to cling to, that merciless slaughter of unborn babies is morally unjustifiable, and even essential for the happiness of the individual and good of the society.'
The Catholic trust says that the conception of baby is due to will of God and a human being has no right to kill that baby, it is ethically unacceptable and morally wrong. This statement is, I think, a very good argument against abortion, hearing this, I think a lot of people who have been considering an abortion won't have one, because the words are so strong, it may even help a person regain their faith.
Before 1967 abortion was illegal in Britain. So why in 1967 did abortion become legal? Abortion became legal because parliament wanted to put a stop a stop to the unfortunate situation that had arose over the years leading up to 1967. About 60 women each year died as a result of 'back-street' abortions. Other women were left seriously injured and thousands were made infertile. The abortions were carried out by unqualified people and performed in unclean conditions. The Abortion Act was passed by parliament providing that:
* Two registered doctors aggress that an abortion can legally be carried out.
* It is carried out before 'the time of viability', i.e. the time when the body can exist on its own outside its mothers womb. This was originally set at 28 weeks of pregnancy but was reduced to 24 weeks in 1990.
* Continuing the pregnancy would involve a greater risk to the mother, or any existing child in the family.
* A termination is necessary to prevent permanent physical or emotional damage to the mother.
* There is a real risk that the baby will be born physically disabled or with learning difficulties.
Those who support abortion say that the 1967 Act confronted the realities of the situation. Whereas the opponents of abortion argue that the Abortion Act has virtually created 'abortion on demand'; abortion without any real restrictions. The Roman Catholic Church believes that all abortions are a form of murder on the basis that human life is sacred, God gave life and only God can take life away. The church teaches
'...Never under any pretext, may abortion be resorted to, either by a family or by a political authority, as a legitimate means of regulating births.' 'Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception. Abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes'
Gaudium et Spes, Second Vatican Council
These statements show us that the church has very strong opinions towards abortion and believes that it is serious moral sin. The church believes that at the moment of conception there is a new human being and therefore abortion is murder.
The teaching of abortion of the Catholic Church is shown in 'The Declaration on Procured Abortion (1974)'. This document points out that respect for human life is not just a Christian duty but something implanted into our hearts and minds. In the twentieth century people have been especially aware of human rights (the rights that all human beings).
'The first right of the human being is his life'
This means no matter what, if you're a human being you have the right to live.
This is the declaration's teaching about when human life begins:
'From the time that life is begun, which is neither that of the father nor the mother. It is rather the life of a new human being with its own growth. It would never be made a human if it were not human already.'
This piece of evidence shows us how/why the church believes life believes at ...
This is a preview of the whole essay
'The first right of the human being is his life'
This means no matter what, if you're a human being you have the right to live.
This is the declaration's teaching about when human life begins:
'From the time that life is begun, which is neither that of the father nor the mother. It is rather the life of a new human being with its own growth. It would never be made a human if it were not human already.'
This piece of evidence shows us how/why the church believes life believes at conception. I also think this statement is saying that life has begun when a life is able to grow to be human, because the human can't just appear from nowhere.
In violation of the historical record, the church teaches that its current position has remained unchanged. St. Augustine (345-430) reversed centuries of Christian teaching, and returned to the Aristotelian concept of 'delayed ensoulment'. He wrote that a human soul couldn't live in an unformed body. Therefore, early in pregnancy, an abortion is not murder because no soul is destroyed. Now, however the churches teaching is quite clear. Abortion is murder. The bible from where the churches teachings are based on appears to be silent on the topic of abortion. John Connery (1977) said:
'If anyone expects to find an explicit condemnation of abortion in the New Testament, he will be disappointed. The silence of the New Testament regarding abortion surpasses even that of the Old Testament.'
On the other hand, there are Biblical passages that might be interpreted as referring to the worth of a fetus. But just because there are no direct references to abortion in the bible does not mean that the bible does no show us that we should respect and have compassion and love for the life God gives. Jesus showed us this in the way he always cared for and helped the sick, elderly and handicapped. He obviously thought that everyone mattered and should be respected. However, opposition to abortion appears to have been a concern within the early Christian Church as evidenced by the Didache (teaching of the twelve apostles), this is shown in chapter 2, 2.2:
'...thou shalt not kill a child by abortion, neither shalt thou slay it when born...'
The Roman Catholic Church says about euthanasia that those whose lives are diminished or weakened in any way should be treated with special care. In particular, the sick, the handicapped and the elderly should be helped to live as normal a life as possible. Whatever its motives euthanasia does mean putting a premature end to the lives of such people. In any civilized Society it is morally unacceptable to even contemplate the possibility. Four reasons for it to be unacceptable are: - Euthanasia is murder, and one of the Ten Commandments is:
'Thou shalt not kill'.
Euthanasia is contrary to the dignity of human beings; Euthanasia destroys the respect that is due to God, the Beginning and End of all life, there is a clear difference between discontinuing treatment and actively killing someone. There are certain situations in which one simply cannot prevent the eventuality of death. These must be recognized and the decision to end treatment taken in consultation with the patient, if at all possible. If not, then the closest relatives should be involved. Catholics believe that:
'We are made in the image of God and therefore human life is God's gift to us and is uniquely precious - we are not the owners of life, but it's minders'
We belong to God because he made us. Many religions follow this belief; so do not believe in suicide and assisted dying.
Jesus said:
'Aren't five sparrows sold for two pennies? Yet not one sparrow is forgotten by god. Even the hairs on your head have all been counted. So do not be afraid; you are worth much more than many sparrows!'
I think what Jesus meant by this was all life deserves respect. No matter who you are or what you do, you deserve respect; a human life must be protected and respected form the moment of conception. Life must be guarded with the greatest care. The statement is referring to the sanctity of life, which just means humans were created in the image and likeness of god, and so life is god's creation and is sacred and holy, and as such should not be meddled with. This would be an argument for both abortion and euthanasia. In 1 Corinthians 3. 16 -17 it says:
'Surely you know that you are gods temple and that gods spirit lives in you! So if anyone destroys god's temple, god will destroy him. For gods temple is holy, and you yourselves are his temple.'
This quote means that life should not be destroyed. Once again this refers to the sanctity of life. This quote warns people who maybe considering euthanasia that if they carry out this act of suicide, then god will destroy you. Here humans are being referred to as gods temple, and saying that gods temple is holy is also saying that human life is sacred and should not be ended under any circumstance.
There are many other viewpoints on the issues of abortion and euthanasia. The views between different groups of Christians differ on abortion and euthanasia. Majority of religions disapprove Euthanasia, Christianity disapproves it according to the belief that, human beings have a special place in God's heart, eyes and creation:
'For you created my inmost being; you (God) knit me together in my mother's womb' (psalm 139)
In the Methodist church the view on abortion is that it's impossible to know when the life of a human begins, saying this they believe that the importance of the embryo being a human increases throughout pregnancy. The 1976 Methodist conference statement says:
'It is always an evil, to be avoided if at all possible by offering care to mothers. However, there are circumstances when abortion will be the lesser of the two evils'
For example if the mother was raped, rape is a greater evil than abortion so therefore an abortion would be allowable.
The Methodists viewpoint on euthanasia is strongly against the idea. This is because of practical difficulties faced by doctors and medical staff. Also there is a risk if made legal, that it would be misused. The Methodists state that what god has given, we cannot take away.
'We are called to use all gods gifts responsibly and to find in every situation the way of compassion.'
The Orthodox Church has similar views as the Catholic Church although with the Orthodox Church they do allow abortion in rare cases, like if the mother's life was at risk. This view is similar to the Church of England view, also the Church of England would the like that the abortion law should be applied more strictly in order to reduce the amount of abortions.
The orthodox view on euthanasia is that it should be considered as murder. Saying this they are aware of the need for comfort and care for the patient. The Orthodox Church has clear guidelines on the right to life:
'We have the responsibility to maintain, preserve and protect our on lives, and those entrusted to us. In case of illness, we are obliged to use every method available to us, to restore health. Life is so precious that it must be respected even when health cannot be fully restored, it should be protected and maintained.'
The Orthodox Church is basically saying here that, life is so precious and should not be ended for any reason at all even if you are terminally ill, you are still alive.
The Salvation Army believe that any competent person in certain conditions should be allowed to 'choose to die' although they oppose to any idea of legalising euthanasia.
The Church of England also opposes the legalisation of euthanasia because they think if euthanasia were allowed, then the value of human life would be undermined, they say we should offer special care to those who have disability or vulnerable through illness. They also believe doctors do not have an obligation to prolong life.
The views of other groups and organisations on abortion and euthanasia differ greatly. The groups in favour of abortion are mostly humanitarian groups the have their own point of view, according to National Abortion Campaign:
'The decision to terminate pregnancy is so important that it can only be made by the person most involved- the women. Women must always have a choice and never have the decision forced upon them. Free abortion facilities should on the NHS for every woman who needs them. We believe that the right of women to control their own fertility is a fundamental human right. Women will not be able to take a full and equal part in the society when we can all decide for ourselves whether and when to have children.'
National Abortion Campaign states the basic right of women to control its own fertility, they say that women have a full right to choose when they want to have children. Humanist Dipper supports abortion by suggesting that Humanist regards abortion better than bringing unwanted humans into the world. It is a mistake to say that Humanist are in favour of abortion; no one can be in favour of abortion, which, except in unexpected circumstances, is result of failed contraception:
'We think there will probably always be a certain number unplanned pregnancies and that the mother concerned should have the complete choice of either complete abortion, or keeping the baby.'
Euthanasia, at the moment is illegal throughout the world apart from in the State of Oregon in USA, where there is a law specifically allowing doctors to prescribe lethal drugs for the purpose of euthanasia. In the Netherlands it is practised widely, although, in fact, it remains illegal.
So the alternative to euthanasia in Christianity is 'Hospice movement'. The hospice movement is an alternative to euthanasia. Dame Cicely Saunders, doctor and founder of the hospice movement says:
'I'm against euthanasia for a positive reason; I have seen people achieve so much in the ending of their lives - times that their families would have missed. It's often time after they might have asked to opt out when they perhaps would have gone in bitterness, whereas they finally go in peace and fulfilment'
The kind of care hospice give to the patients is very distinctive for they offer tender loving care. The three aims of hospices are: - To relieve pain, to enable patients and families to face up to death and to care for emotional needs of the relatives.
A hospice offers care to the patients and their families at the most difficult stages in their lives.
The aims of the voluntary euthanasia society (EXIT) are to change the law so that an adult person suffering from a severe illness, for which no relief is known, should be entitled by law to mercy of a painless death, if and only if, that is their expressed wish. Doctors should be allowed to help incurable patients to die peacefully at their own request. The patient must have signed, at least thirty days previously, a declaration making his or her own request known.
In a 'living will' a person asks for euthanasia in the event that they become terminally ill and unable to communicate their own decision to relatives or doctors. Richard Hume of EXIT states:
'We have 20,000 requests for 'living wills' each year, showing that a large proportion of the British people would like to see voluntary euthanasia become legal. Using euthanasia would save scarce medical resources, which could be used to help those who can be cured, they say. Everyone should be able to have 'the mercy of a painless death''.
I will do two examples of abortion and two examples of euthanasia. I will state what the church teaches in each situation and what the church says in each situation. Also I'll say what other viewpoints of other groups are.
One situation of abortion would be if a woman were to become pregnant through being raped. In this situation the church would teach no to abortion, they say you are combating one evil of rape, with another of murder. Being Christians we should follow the bible, and one of the Ten Commandments is:
'Thou shalt not kill'.
The church would offer the woman counselling, and maybe suggest putting the child up for adoption, so that people who maybe can't have children of their own etc. could appreciate the child. The church would say that although the rape isn't the mother's fault, it also and definitely isn't the fault of the unborn child. The church might say every child is precious and a gift from god. No one can have the right to destroy that gift. Every baby is defenceless and needs protecting. The national abortion campaign will feel differently about this situation. They will think each woman has the right to choose what happens to her own body. The child will grow to find out that its father is a rapist and that the child's mother didn't really choose to have him/her. The child to the mother would be a constant reminder to her of that act of violence. The child wouldn't have a father to look up to. It's unfair to bring an unwanted child into the world. Surely no one would want to bring an unwanted child to the world.
Another situation for the case of abortion is threat of the mother dying if the child is to be born, the possibility of when the mother gives birth that she dies as well as the baby, the mother dies, the baby dies or both survive. In this dilemma, still, the Catholic Church would teach absolutely not to abortion. Every baby is defenceless and needs protecting. The rights of the unborn child are at least equal to those of the mother - if they don't exceed them. The priest might say that if the Catholic Church won't campaign for the unborn baby, who will? The church would support the family and say finally that god will decide who lives and dies.
'All human life is scared. All men must recognize this fact,
Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI
Maybe the priest would tell the family about Jesus and there must be a reason for suffering because god let his own son die for doing nothing wrong. Humanists, Church of England, Methodist and Orthodox Church may all disagree. They might say, what about the family of the mother? If she dies, and she has other children, she will leave them with no mother and the newborn baby with no mother, surely to carry to on with the pregnancy would be being selfish towards everyone who knew the mother. Without doubt a woman who has family, has priority over a baby that isn't even born yet.
A situation concerning euthanasia would be if a very old person that has no family and no - one visits them, they are lonely and feel there is nothing left to love for. In this situation the Catholic Church would say no to euthanasia. The Catholic Church would teach euthanasia as being murder. It is up to God when we join him. Only god can decide when we are ready to join him in heaven. We as humans, inferior to god should not interfere with when life is taken away. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaching of euthanasia is:
'(1) The decision should be made by the patient if he or she is competent and able, or, if not, by those legally entitled to act for the patient, whose reasonable will and legitimate interests must always be respected. (2) Even if death is imminent, the ordinary care owed to a sick person cannot be legitimately interrupted. (3) Discontinuing medical procedures that are burdensome, dangerous, extraordinary, or disproportionate to the expected outcome can be legitimate: it is the refusal of over -zealous' treatment. (4) Whatever its motives and means, direct euthanasia consists in putting an end to the lives of handicapped, sick, or dying persons. It is morally unacceptable. Thus an act or omission which, of itself, or by intention, causes death in order to eliminate suffering constitutes a murder greatly contrary to the dignity of the human person and to the respect due to the living God, his Creator. (5)The use of painkillers to alleviate the suffering of the dying, even at the risk of shortening their days, can be morally in conformity with human dignity if death is not willed either as an end or a means, but only foreseen and tolerated as inevitable.'
The church would offer the person as much care as possible and try and make the remainder of their life worth living.
EXIT, who are for the idea of euthanasia may say in this instance that this case in not permitable for euthanasia. The person isn't in an incurable state and in this case, if euthanasia happened, then in other words its pretty much suicide.
A different circumstance of euthanasia is if a member of your family is terminally ill and in constant pain. They tell you all the time they would rather be dead because they are in so much suffering. In this event the church would again teach euthanasia as being murder. It is up to God when we join him. Only god can decide when we are ready to join him in heaven. We as humans, inferior to god should not interfere with when life is taken away. The church would offer as much care and support to the patient as possible but when medical treatment is prolonging the life of the patient then the church says to let the person go, as they are artificially living and it is time to join god. The hospice movement would advise not having euthanasia, but to care for them. This is because the last few weeks of their life may be in pain but, can also be the time where reveal a new part of their personality or find out something new about a person they love. It's often time after they might have asked to opt out when they perhaps would have gone in bitterness, whereas they finally go in peace and fulfilment.
EXIT would argue that People should not be left lingering in pain. They should not have to suffer when death is inevitable. People do have the right to commit suicide, although it is a tragic and individual act. However euthanasia is not suicide. It is not a private act; you have the support of family and friends. Euthanasia is about letting a person assist another's death to save them from long painful deaths. When someone is incurably ill and they are in constant pain surely there is nothing going for them. The best option would probably to die in peace.
2. "God gives life and only god can take it away." Do you agree or disagree?
There are many different points of view in answer to the statement above. Most Christians believe in the in the importance of life and therefore disagree with abortion and euthanasia. We must remember that not all people follow a religion or if they do disagree with some of their religions specific demands and therefore might be in favour of the choice to have an abortion or carry out euthanasia.
The church would teach that god is almighty and only him can take life away. God gives us life so who are we to take it away. In the case of pregnancy the child is a gift from god not just a growing organism.
By taking another's life through abortion or euthanasia you are not only murdering, but also attempting to play god. I think it is wrong to take away your life and don't necessarily think it's your decision. I could disagree with this statement because, Surely god wants his people to be happy, therefore by ending pain and suffering he is granting them that wish. God is love. Stopping suffering is a loving thing to do. So euthanasia could bring more glory to god than keeping a suffering person alive. Surely god wouldn't want someone to carry on with their life when they're in complete agony. I think though, it is necessary to play the role of god in some situations. There might be medical supplies that keep people alive. If these drugs are being used to keep a terminally ill person, who can't speak, hear or do practically anything, alive then surely we should let the person die because the people who need the medicine will be able to receive it and maybe even have a full recovery, instead of them dieing or being in pain for the rest of their lives. God gave doctors the ability to develop the euthanasia drugs. If god had not wanted them to be used then he wouldn't have provided any tools that would allow this. I think this is a poor argument because he may have provided the tools to allow this, but he didn't intend us to use them in this manner. God gave us arms; we can fight people with our arms, does this mean God intended us to fight? I think the answer is no. I think the strongest argument against this statement is that it's our life so undoubtedly it's our choice to end it if we want. Because not all people are Christian and believe in god then they would most definitely say euthanasia is ok. If they don't believe there is a god but just living organisms on a planet called earth, then if you are in pain and suffering, there doesn't seem any mental reason to stop you from wanting to die peacefully rather than have your life prolonged t suffer further.
In the case of abortion I believe that there are so many options open to the mother so that even if she does want the child she does not have to have it aborted and therefore I believe that abortion is unacceptable in most cases. One of the options available to the mother is that once she has the child she can have it adopted. There are many couples that want a child, but can't because of infertility problems and so would be very grateful for the chance to adopt a baby. This would mean that the child would be welcomed into a family which want a child and therefore creating a loving environment for the child to grow up in. Should anyone have the right to deny a child the sort of loving environment it deserves just because they don't want to bring the child into this world?
I believe that not in all circumstances god has the right to take away life. For example if a woman was raped and is emotionally traumatised and having the child will only even further increase a disturbance in her mental mind then abortion should be considered. However the woman who has been the victim of a rape can receive help and therefore allow us as Christians to show compassionate love and care to the victim. I think it's not the woman's fault she was raped so if she didn't want a baby she would have to live with for the rest of her life, which I don't thinks fair considering she was the victim.
I think I'd agree with this statement because life is sacred. Euthanasia destroys life. So it must be wrong. This means life is most holy, it is god given. It is saying euthanasia destroys the respect that is due to god, the beginning and end of all life.
We only live life once so we should live it for as long as possible. Once life is over we wont be able to return. By allowing euthanasia to become legal, you are basically telling the terminally ill people they are allowed to die, by saying this, terminally ill patients could take it as saying you can die because there's not much point of you living. Making euthanasia legal is having complete lack of respect for most Christian religions. If we aren't careful religions will be wiped out completely and then people will only be able to ask themselves, "What's the point of living?" then the sacredness of life is lost.
I think instead of trying to kill off the dying we should assist them and care for them in the time they most need it. We should make them as comfortable as possible. Nobody should want to die, but just take it when it is ready for him or her to go. Not too early or too late.
There are also other life and death issues that should be considered in answering to the statement such as capital punishment. I strongly disagree with capital punishment as we should be able to forgive people for their sins and help them to fix what they have done wrong instead of inflicting pain on the 'criminal'. God should be the judge of whether a person should die. We do not have the right to say that a person should die because they have done something wrong. Jesus taught us to forgive people no matter what the sin.
In answer to the statement I would say that as a Catholic I mostly agree with it. I think that God has given a child the right to life at the moment of conception and that life should only end when God feels it is time. We must remember that everyone has different views and opinions on this subject and so we should not be prejudiced to anyone just because they do not share the same views as us. Therefore I believe that with some things people should have the right to a choice but it should be up to the individual person to decide on what they believe is the right and moral thing to do. I think that more counselling and advice sessions should be available to people to help them make such a decision. This currently happens in the Catholic Church, and I think has helped a lot of people through hard times where they may have given up.
Phil Richardson
