As a Catholic, I stand for the affirmation of life, and that means all life; I affirm the dignity of each human person, given to them at the point of their conception; it is a dignity which never ends, not even at the point of death. Indeed, many people seem to forget this – human dignity extends into eternity; just as it is easy for many to disregard human dignity at the point of conception, it seems even easier to disregard human dignity after death. After all, the person is no longer alive, what does it matter now? Such a position, however, implies a rather nihilistic understanding of the world, because it seems to accept that there is some sort of personal annihilation once one reaches the point of death. As a Catholic, I cannot and will not agree; we pray for the souls of the dead and we pray with the communion of the saints; death is not the end, but only a beginning.
This is not to say death is a good thing; it is a point of personal discord, a disruption of one’s proper sense of being (we are called to be incarnate; human personality reaches its fulfillment in the flesh, not separated from it). In death, while human dignity continues, certainly there is a victory of sorts (however temporary) for the forces which contend against such dignity. Each death represents a continuation of the fall; each death represents the assault of Satan against heaven; each death represents the attempt of Satan to destroy God, because in the death of each human person, another example, another person made in the image and likeness of God, has been obliterated from the face of the earth. Death is the greatest force and tool of the devil.
“By death he conquered death, and to those in the tombs, he granted life.”
Indeed, death, the greatest force against God, founds its end – in the death of God incarnate, in the death of Jesus. In his death, the purpose of death has been met – death, aimed at wiping out the image and likeness of God, aimed at deicide, finds its purpose fulfilled. Death met the Lord of life, and killed him; but the victory was hollow, for in his acceptance of death, Jesus, God, brings about the final end of death.
Death has been met by the God of life, and it has been overcome. However, its legacy continues. The victory is in eternity; its legacy is in time. As temporal beings, we encounter it here, on this side of eternity, where it continues to represent the Satanic attack against God and the dignity of life. In this encounter, we must continue to represent the force of life, the force of human dignity; we must not accept the culture of death in any of its manifestations.
Sadly, this is easier said than done. Rare is the individual not influenced, in some fashion, by the powers of death. Indeed, we see death before us; we know we must encounter the fullness of its strength, and succumb to its pull. We will die; it is something we cannot prevent. This fact, however, brings with it a siren cry: “If we will all die one day, what does it matter when? What does it matter in how we die? What does it matter if this person dies today instead of next year? The end is just the same?” Of course, the end is not the same, because in the extra years of life, in the extra years of developing the fullness of our human personality, we are free to manifest more of the image and likeness of God within us.
The siren, however, still calls out to us; it often manipulates us, and chooses our battles for us. The culture of death might give a small battle for us to fight, one which we can win, but they do so to divert our attention. The leaders of the pro-life movement, I feel, have often been manipulated in this fashion. Let us look at one such battle, and question the implications of the pro-life victory to see if it really is the victory the pro-life movement thinks it is.
One of the great horrors in our age is the so-called “partial-birth abortion.” No one who is sane can look at it and believe it is anything but a monstrous act performed upon a baby. It should never be allowed to be, and with that, I agree with the pro-life movement. However, for years, it seems to be the major thrust of the pro-life movement’s political debates and battles have been to stop “partial-birth abortion.” Again, I agree it must be stopped, but I do not think the implications of this battle and how it has been waged has been properly understood. The pro-life movement, by focusing upon the fact that the baby is more or less, already born, has given great political weight and victory to the forces of death. How is this so? Because they base their arguments upon the logic of those who support abortion: they say, with those who support abortion, birth has a fundamental effect on the dignity of the human person. The focus on the baby being more or less born implies an acceptance that there is something different about killing a person after they are born than before they are born. By creating laws against “partial-birth abortion,” this difference is then further established in the legal system, and put in place, not by those who support abortion, but by those who oppose it.
The leaders of the pro-life movement lack the wisdom needed to actually challenge the culture of death. They have, for the most part, sold themselves to that same culture: they accept its principles, and argue within them. What I said above about “partial-birth abortion” can be said about many other issues. In part, the problem lies with the politicization of life; the leaders of the pro-life movement often imply the solution can only be political. While it is true there is the need for a political aspect to the movement, the focus on politics itself diverts the attention of the pro-life movement. Many involved with the pro-life cause think all they need to do is vote for the right politicians and they have done their part! Of course, when it is shown no politician really represents the fullness of the pro-life cause, they find it is possible to excuse this inconsistency from the politicians. Do they not realize the politicians see this? The politicians realize the lip-service given to the pro-life movement by many of its followers, and so they do the same: give lip service during campaigns, but then after elected, only give as much back to the movement as the people themselves put in. For the politician, it becomes a nice way to get votes; for the voter, it is a nice way to feel they satisfy their conscience; but neither, it seems, really understands the value of life, and until the voter moves beyond the political spectrum and into the world at large, this is where things will remain.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In