This article was first published
in The Universe
Barbarous Britain
By Dwight Longenecker
Some time ago my
friend Steve told me about a conversation with
his fifteen-year-old son. At the time there was
considerable protest about the slaughter of whales,
and the boy asked, ‘Why are they so upset about
the slaughter of whales, but they don’t care
about the slaughter of unborn babies?’ The same
question applies to the government’s enthusiasm
for banning the hunting of foxes. Why are people
so upset over the barbarity of fox hunting, and
totally easygoing about the poisoning, dismemberment
and discarding of millions of unborn human children?
They hold their views
in sincerity, but there are four underlying problems
to their way of thinking. First it is sentimental.
One gets the impression that the barbaric killing
of foxes is wrong simply because the fox is a
furry fellow with a fluffy tail and it is a terrible
thing to kill a cute animal in a cruel way. I
am not supporting fox hunting, but making a point
that the objections to it are often sentimental,
and sentimentality is often inconsistent and
false. So the objectors complain about barbarism
and turn a blind eye to the barbarism of abortion.
They are soft hearted about foxes, but hard hearted
towards unborn human babies. The second problem
is that a soft heart leads to a soft head. Sentimental
views are based on ignorance and mis-information.
People who are in favour of abortion insist on
thinking of the foetus as a ‘blob of jelly.’ The
threat to women’s health is consistently underplayed
and the termination of a human life is portrayed
in nice terms like, ‘termination of pregnancy.’ The
third problem with this sort of thinking is that
it is often based on class distinctions. It is
upper class to hunt and working class to be opposed.
Poor girls are sent for abortions by middle class
doctors. Class is no basis for moral arguments.
Finally, the decisions are often taken according
to what is practical or seems convenient. We
should always remember that the Nazi concentration
camps seemed ‘the right solution to a problem’.
Easiest is rarely best. Solutions to problems
must be moral as well as sensible.
When sentimentality,
ignorance, class and ‘doing what works’ combine
you end up with hopeless contradictions and terrible
cruelty. Those who hold such contradictory views
may hold them sincerely, but they exist in isolation
in a kind of moral darkness. This is why it is
vital that we turn outside ourselves for sound
teaching on moral matters. The Catechism of the
Catholic Church puts the Christian moral teaching
quite plainly in all matters. So it says about
animals, ‘Animals are God's creatures. He
surrounds them with his providential care. By
their mere existence they bless him and give
him glory. Thus men owe them kindness… It is
contrary to human dignity to cause animals to
suffer or die needlessly. It is likewise unworthy
to spend money on them that should as a priority
go to the relief of human misery. One can love
animals; one should not direct to them the affection
due only to persons.’ (CCC: 2416,2418) In
other words, we must be kind to animals. Hunting
and cruelty for sport must be wrong. However,
the Catechism puts our concern for animals in
perspective. They are not more important than
people.
When it comes
to abortion, the Catechism is clear. Abortion is
the murder of an unborn child. ‘Since the
first century the Church has affirmed the moral
evil of every procured abortion. This teaching
has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct
abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either
as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to
the moral law… Life must be protected with the
utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion
and infanticide are abominable crimes.’ (CCC:2270,2271)
I have used the contrast
between fox hunting and abortion to illustrate
how the
human mind, cut off from the illumination of
God’s teaching, soon falls into ridiculous contradictions
and dangerous lies. If we judge only according
to sentimentality, class, ignorance or what is
practical then we will eventually commit enormous
crimes, and we will do so all the time believing
that we are doing good.
I will never forget a conversation
I once had with a nice middle class lady doctor.
This country doctor told me that she regularly
sent single mothers from the local slum area
to have an abortion. I asked if that was because
there was a threat to the mother’s life. The
well spoken lady doctor smiled condescendingly
and said, ‘Not really, but the child would have
had such a terrible life.’ In other words,
that child was condemned to die before he even
had a chance to live because the middle class
doctor judged his existence being brought up
by a single mum in a deprived area just too terrible
to contemplate. This sickening death sentence
was a sentimental judgement combined with ignorance,
class prejudice and a false idea of what it was
practical to do.
These kinds of arguments
are highly dangerous. Already they are used to
condone abortion on a massive scale. A combination
of sentimentality, class prejudice, ignorance
and ‘doing what works’ is also preparing the
way for widespread euthanasia. The sentimental
person will say, ‘Poor George is suffering so
terribly. Let’s put him out of his misery.’ Ignorant
people will say, ‘Life is more about a person’s “quality
of life” than whether their heart is beating.’ Rich
people who are counting the cost of intensive
health care will point out that the economical
thing is to end the sick person’s life. Before
long these same arguments will be used to eliminate
the increasing numbers of elderly people, the
mentally ill, the disabled and the poor.
If you stand up against
this horror don’t imagine that you will be thanked.
St Simeon the New Theologian wrote, ‘Those,
then, who from their birth are under the dominion
of darkness and are unwilling to contemplate
the spiritual light… look on those who have come
to that light and speak of the things of the
light as adversaries and enemies, since their
words wound them… the divinely inspired word
of a spiritual and holy man is like a two-edged
sword in the heart of a carnal man. It causes
him pain and provokes him to contradict and to
hate because of his ignorance and unbelief.’
We must remember
that we are engaged in a spiritual and moral
battle. The only answer is for individuals, families,
communities and society at large to turn to a
strong, clear voice of moral authority. The Catholic
Church is the only unified, international, historic,
compassionate and intelligent voice for that
moral authority. First we must live by that moral
teaching in our own lives, but we must also take
action in our society when we see the moral law
being violated by sentimentality, class, ignorance
and the ‘practical’ approach. We must speak out.
If euthanasia is around the corner then our very
lives may depend upon it.
Return
to Articles main page
