under the patronage of St Joseph and St Dominic

By the rivers of Babylon there we sat and wept, remembering Zion;
on the poplars that grew there we hung up our harps. . . Ps 136

CHRISTOPHER PEARSON’S MORAL THEOLOGY

There is clearly a defect in the formation of the convert Australian Catholic journalist, Christopher Pearson.  In his Op Ed piece for The Australian, 20-21 June 2009, Conservative’s hero a hard man to read, he writes—

“Classical moral theology has for centuries recognised a husband’s right to choose to save his spouse’s life at the expense of the child’s, if the medical advice is that he has to make an either-or choice…”

The constant teaching of the Catholic Church over 2,000 years contradicts the existence of this alleged right.  Thus, in December 1930, Pius XI—

“[H]ow deeply we feel for the mother whose fulfillment of her natural duty involves her in grave danger to health and even to life itself.  But can reason ever avail to excuse the direct killing of the innocent?  For this is what is at stake.  The infliction of death whether upon mother or upon child is against the commandment of God and the voice of nature: Thou shalt not kill!  The lives of both are equally sacred and no one, not even public authority, can ever have the right to destroy them.  It is absurd to invoke against innocent human beings the right of the State to inflict capital punishment, for this is valid only against the guilty.  Nor is there any question here of the right of self-defence, even to the shedding of blood, against an unjust assailant, for none could describe as an unjust assailant an innocent child.  Nor, finally, does there exist any so-called right of extreme necessity which could extend to the direct killing of an innocent human being.  Honourable and skillful doctors are therefore worthy of all praise when they make every effort to protect and preserve the life of both mother and child.  On the contrary, those who encompass the death of the one or the other, whether on the plea of medical treatment or from a motive of misguided compassion, act in a manner unworthy of the high repute of the medical profession.” (Casti Connubii, 31.12.1930)

It is precisely because judges have failed to uphold the moral principle at the heart of the matter—the sanctity of human life, of all human life—that western countries like Australia find themselves in their present appalling moral state.  The only thing ‘classical’ about the view Pearson defends is the case it embraces, a type used all too frequently by those content to ignore principle for the sake of expediency.

Hard cases, as any lawyer will tell him, make bad law.  Hard cases provide no excuse for the denial of principle.

Michael Baker
21st June 2009—Twelfth Sunday of the Liturgical Year
_________________________________________

ADDENDUM

It has been suggested that Christopher Pearson was referring to the exceptional case covered by the Principle of the Double Effect such as arises, for example, with an ectopic pregnancy.  The Principle of the Double Effect provides that it is not licit to perform an act wherefrom flow two effects, the one good, the other evil, unless four conditions are fulfilled:

1. the act itself is good, or at least morally neutral;
2. the good lost by the evil effect does not outweigh the good of the good effect;
3. the good and evil effects flow at least with equal immediacy, but never the evil before the good; and,
4. the good effect alone is intended.[1]

Now Pearson grounds his opinion on this premise—

“...if the medical advice is that [the husband] has to make an either-or choice..." 

That this falls outside the principle can be shown from an analysis of its application.  If an ectopic pregnancy was allowed to proceed, there is no ‘either/or’ about the issue.  Its continuance would kill BOTH mother and child because the child is developing in an organ other than the womb.  The principle allows the removal of the fallopian tube to save the life of the mother: the death of the child, though it is an inevitable consequence, is not intended: nor can any guilt attach when the operation is performed.  Similarly, there is no 'either/or' about the issue confronting the fighter pilot who shoots down an airliner commandeered by Muslim extremists before it collides with a skyscraper.  If the pilot does not act, BOTH passengers and the occupants of the building will be killed.  If he does act the lives of those in the building will be saved.

Pearson’s remarks can only be taken to refer to the situation of the difficult childbirth where the life of the mother is threatened.[2]   It is not licit, in such a case, to prefer the life of either, as Pius XI makes clear.

Pearson is wrong again in the assertion contained in his next sentence—

“[N]o moral theology... could conceivably extrapolate from an extreme case and conclude that anyone who wanted it should have easy access to an abortifacient as of right."

The evidence is overwhelmingly against him.  It is not a matter of “moral theology” building on this extreme case, but the public perception (manifested in the country's laws) building on it.  Because of the influence of Protestantism rather than Catholicism on the thinking of English legislators, statute law in England in the early 20th century was modified to protect a surgeon who intervened to kill an unborn child whose birth threatened the life of the mother.  The betrayal of moral principle entailed here was incorporated into legislation in Australia shortly afterwards.  With this permission, it became licit to kill in some circumstances.  Thenceforth the rule of morals was no longer absolute.

Once you admit a principle, the consequences flow.  The law having admitted the principle that evil may be done that good may come of it, the foundation was laid for the granting of greater, and greater, concessions.  The judges of England and Australia extended them after Dr Aleck Bourne, an English gynaecologist, decided to test the law by aborting a young girl raped by four guardmen in 1938.  He was acquitted in a celebrated trial (Rex v Bourne).  Now, in the early 21st century, we have reached the point where any alleged threat to the mother's wellbeing will suffice to permit her to kill her unborn child.  It is impossible to police these claims and the inevitable consequence is with us: abortion on demand.  It is little consolation to the world that Dr Bourne later repented of the action he had taken.  But the harm was done not by him, but by the influence of Protestantism on English and Australian legislative thinking.

However, let us concede the point that Mr Pearson may have intended to refer only to cases covered by the Principle of the Double Effect, and that he has expressed himself badly.  Who among his readers, the vast majority of them secular and atheistic, would know that he was referring to a principle whose application is so carefully surrounded with conditions?  And why did he not make it clear, if this is what he was referring to?

At the very least his remarks are misleading.  At worst, they are a scandal.

MJB
28th June 2009—Thirteenth Sunday

WHAT WENT WRONG WITH VATICAN II

In 1998, Dr Ralph McInerny published a book bearing this title.  His approach limited the scope for criticism.  We show here what, indeed, it was that went wrong with the Council, and what is needed to cure the evils that have followed upon it.  more

ASCENSION THURSDAY

The failure to celebrate Christ's Ascension on the Thursday forty days after His Resurrection is yet another triumph of expediency over liturgical truth. more

TWO CONFERENCES ON EVOLUTION

DIGNITATIS HUMANAE—RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS II

This is the reply to a second set of objections to the theses advanced in the papers on this website critical of the Vatican Council's Declaration on Religious Freedom.  more

DIGNITATIS HUMANAE—MICHAEL DAVIES' STUDY

Among the best analyses of Vatican II's Declaration on Religious Freedom is Michael Davies' book, "The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty". This paper exposes some of its few shortcomings.  more

GREATEST POPE OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

There were nine popes in the twentieth century.  Which of them was the greatest?  more

JOHN XXIII AND VETERUM SAPIENTIA

On 22nd February 1962, in the Apostolic Constitution, Veterum Sapientia, Bl. John XXIII wrote as follows:  "[I]t is necessary that the language the Church employs be not only universal but immutable.  For if the truths of the Catholic Church were to be handed on via one or other of more recent and malleable languages, no one of which is superior to another, the meaning of these truths, varied as they are, would not be manifest to everyone with sufficient clarity and precision.  There would, moreover, be no language which could serve as a common and constant norm by which to gauge the exact meaning of other renderings. But Latin is indeed such a language.  It is set and unchanging.  It has long since ceased to be affected by the alteration in meaning of words which is the inevitable concomitant of daily, popular use...  [T]he Catholic Church has a dignity far surpassing that of every merely human society, for it was founded by Christ the Lord.  It is altogether fitting, therefore, that the language it uses should be noble, majestic, and non-vernacular."

DIGNITATIS HUMANAE—RESPONSE TO OBJECTIONS

This is a reply to an objection by a critic to the theses advanced in the papers critical of the Declaration on Religious Freedom.  more

THE TROUBLE WITH DIGNITATIS HUMANAE—III. THE DEVASTATION IN ITS TRAIN

We list here the more grievous of the evils that have flowed from the errors in the Declaration on Religious Liberty.  more

THE TROUBLE WITH DIGNITATIS HUMANAE—II. THE DILEMMA

We address here the issue of how two contradictory Church documents, each apparently infallible, can be reconciled. more

THE TROUBLE WITH DIGNITATIS HUMANAE—ERROR MASQUERADING AS RIGHT

This is the first of three papers on the Declaration on Religious Freedom of the Second Vatican Council.  more

LIGHT: ARISTOTLE & ST THOMAS

THE TRUTH AND MEANING OF HUMAN SEXUALITY

In November 1995, with the blessing of Pope John Paul, the Pontifical Council for the Family published this document to assist Catholic families with the critical issue of the formation of children in human sexuality.  It has been almost universally ignored, especially by our bishops and priests who think nothing of endorsing the promulgation of secular humanist 'sex education' in our so-called 'Catholic' schools.  We recommend Catholic parents to download the document, to study it closely and to implement its directions in their own families.  more (pdf version only)

WAS LUTHER NOT SUCH A BAD CHAP AFTER ALL?

What sort of a man was the heretic Martin Luther?  Could the Church possibly 'rehabilitate' him?  more

THE SCHISMATIC TENDENCY IN ‘CREATION SCIENCE’

'Creation Science', the naive assertion that the universe was created only 6,000 years ago, is a Protestant thing.  Its adoption by Catholics presents real dangers to their faith. more

FAILURE OF THE EXECUTIVE POWER

It belongs to the father of a household to exercise discipline in his family.  This is true not only of the family, but of the household of the Church.  The Pope and each of the bishops of the Church, indeed, each priest, is a father in charge of a household.  Each has duties to rule and govern his household with authority given him by God.  If he fails in those duties the harm that results is as extensive as is the reach of his authority.  In this paper we argue that the failure of respect for discipline so characteristic of the modern world began in the Catholic Church in 1962 and has continued unabated ever since.  We argue that it is this failure which has permitted the folly of Feminism to flourish in the Church, and in the world. more

THE LOSS OF METAPHYSICS

John of Salisbury, 12th Century philosopher, says in his Metalogicon: 'Bernard of Chartres used to say that we are like dwarfs sitting on the shoulders of giants. We see more... because they raise us up...' In the century that followed John of Salisbury, the greatest of the intellectual giants appeared, Thomas Aquinas. His philosophy, metaphysics, is the only ultimately satisfying explanation of reality, the only philosophy which leads us inevitably to the Author of all reality, Almighty God. Thomas's philosophy was adopted by the Catholic Church as her own to assist in formulating doctrine and in solving the great problems of morals. Yet, in the last 40 years that philosophy has been abandoned and the Church and the world have suffered. If the Church is to be returned to her rightful position of influence in the world, her bishops and teachers must return to St Thomas's metaphysics. more