The Consistency of the Consistent Ethic of Life

The Catholic Thing

By Msgr. Robert J. Batule But first, a note: Be sure to tune in tomorrow, Thursday, April 10th, at 8 PM Eastern to EWTN for a new episode of 'The World Over.' TCT Editor-in-Chief Robert Royal and contributor Fr. Gerald E. Murray will join host Raymond Arroyo to discuss the new Vatican 'Declaration on Human Dignity,' as well as other recent developments in the Church, Check your local listings for the channel in your area. Shows are usually available shortly after first airing on the EWTN YouTube channel. Now for monsignor's column... In Evangelium Vitae (1995), Pope Saint John Paul II places contraception alongside of abortion, calling both of them "fruits of the same tree." - (13) The allusion to a tree takes us back to the Book of Genesis. There is an exchange there between the woman Eve and the serpent. The serpent asks the woman, "Did God really tell you not to eat from any of the trees in the garden?" (Genesis 3:1) Eve answers, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; it is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God said, You shall not eat it or even touch it, lest you die." (Genesis 3:2-3) The forbidden fruit of Genesis is enough to tell us that we are dealing with sin. The Bible teaches us plainly that sin opposes God. That stricture ought to be sufficient for us to avoid what alienates us from God, but we don't just live in our heads. Our desires overwhelm us at times, and we succumb to temptation. We give in to concupiscence. From the earliest times (The Didache, c. 90 AD), contraception has been regarded as sinful. Until 1930 and the Lambeth Conference, the Christian witness against contraception had been universal. Later in the twentieth century, along came the Sexual Revolution and the Pill. To borrow a term from Peter Berger (d. 2017), an influential sociologist, the sacred canopy had just been cracked. At first, there was pushback against the Sexual Revolution and the Pill. It came with the encyclical Humanae Vitae (1968), and the dominant reaction to it at the time was severe criticism. How could the Church be so retrograde? Why does the Church always get in the way of progress? There is a point, still in that early part of the encyclical Evangelium Vitae, where the Holy Father posits an even deeper relation between contraception and abortion. And it would be that "the pro-abortion culture is especially strong precisely where the Church's teaching on contraception is rejected." - (13) Not only are contraception and abortion fruits of the same tree as cited above, but one evil follows on the heels of the other. JP TWO knew this not through survey research the way some sociologists would, but as a philosopher whose own ground-breaking theology of the body helped to point a new way forward for the Church's teaching on sexuality. In late 1983, Cardinal Joseph Bernardin delivered a lecture at Fordham University introducing what would become known as the "consistent ethic of life." It had only been six months since the American Bishops approved and published their pastoral letter The Challenge of Peace. What the Cardinal sought to do in his address was show how the sanctity of life was at stake in more than just one issue, that one issue being abortion. In the address, Bernardin argued that a direct attack on life in the womb is similar to a direct attack on civilian population centers with a nuclear missile. In both instances, there is the intentional loss of human life. Both are obviously always wrong. There were also passing references in the address to hunger, homelessness, undocumented immigrants, and even to human rights in U.S. foreign policy in Central America. There are, he said, multiple issues having "an inner relationship" to each other. With that "inner relationship," the pro-life position must be seen as much bigger than abortion, say the proponents of the consistent ethic of life approach. Contraception however was never mentioned - even with its very clear "inn...