Questions to the Moralist - Personal Web Server - Boston College

eality, life therefore is inviolable, it is then sacred for it belongs to God – “God is the
author of life.”
However, in the light of the John Paul II’s magisterial teaching using the sanctity of
human life argument vis-à-vis the new moral argument as proposed by Keenan which is
as well anchored in the principles of the said document, calling out for the preservation of
life is a valid argument. It is valid because it is in this line of argument that we can posit
the morality or the ethical “consideration” and even “justification” of the cases like
ectopic pregnancy and etc. where medical procedures might cause a damage indirectly to
the person itself or either to the other side because if, it will not be done at all, the effect
and casualty may arise. Like for instance, the first child of my aunt that after the delivery
the doctor found out that the heart has defect due to a blockage in a certain capillary and
the chances is vague. It is because first the procedure is crucial and sensitive, second the
finances, third, they still have to travel here in Manila from Mindanao because of the
medical facilities needed are in the city hospital and fourth, the doctor himself IS quite
skeptical for the child’s survival.
The child was in the ICU for almost 2 weeks already and was really struggling for life
and the longer that child stayed in that condition, the more the child accumulate
complications.
Still the parents were looking the possible means and it was really tough, until such time
they decided for the last resort of “mercy killing.” The child was confined in the hospital
for two weeks and the bill WAS 90,000.00 pesos considering that both of them were
farmers of a small inherited farm land in Mindanao.
Thus, it is in this line of argument and cases that Keenan’s article makes a sense in
proposing a moral argument for the preservation of human life vis-à-vis in the emerging
crucial cases of moral questions of “killing” and preserving life within the ambit of a
sound theological reasoning. In addition, Joseph Donceel is as well making sense along
this line of moral argument when he contended saying, “it is not immoral to terminate
pregnancy... provided there are serious reasons for such intervention.” Thus, this is a new
path of understanding the moral question(s) regarding the preservation of human life
based from the former principle of the sanctity of life and ultimately from Evangelium
Vitae. I am personally open to this kind of moral understanding because it is in this
aspect that we allow ourselves for dialogue from the moral absolutes and all the way to
the emerging present crucial issues so that the moral objective can possibly be attained
which is the well being and goodness of man himself and that is open, and sensitive to the
different moral circumstances. After all, this is our entire goal and perhaps the Lord of
Life argument implies the same moral objective that is the well being of man! [please
give your comment on this... (vis-à-vis the physicalist and personalist approach?)] how
about my understanding of the document, is it correct?
Fr. Bretzke Replies:
24