Moral and Ethical Limits of Religous Doctrine

Readers: What follows is an article from the Tampa Bay TImes which I found interesting and in need of clarification about the core ethical issues of the proposed health care legislation. My response to the writer and the editor follows. Feel free to comment if you like. MM


Column by John Romano, Tampa Bay Times February 2, 2012

Simple question: Whom do you most trust? Your church? Your country? Your conscience?
Because, when it comes to birth control, one choice may be in conflict with the others. And in the coming days you may be asked to take sides in a battle that, in some ways, is entirely devoid of a villain.
In case you haven't been following the story, the Catholic Church is strongly opposing the Affordable Care Act because it will soon require contraception be provided free of charge in employer health insurance plans.
Catholic leaders argue, not unreasonably, that this mandate intrudes on long-held church teachings. Sen. Marco Rubio seems to agree, and introduced a bill on Monday that would allow religious hospitals and schools to be excused from the rule.
The Department of Health and Human Services argues, not unreasonably, that contraceptive products are an integral part of preventive care. It could also be pointed out that birth control is not required under the law but merely made available.
The Obama administration has tried to split the difference by agreeing to a provision that exempts those who work directly for a church (as opposed to a church-affiliated business) and by giving religious organizations an extra year to comply with the policy.
For the church, that wasn't enough. Wasn't even close. And this is where the story gets sticky.
Bishop Robert Lynch said the Diocese of St. Petersburg will not comply with the law, and instead will drop health insurance for about 2,300 employees. The employees will be given money to buy their own coverage.
The bishop went a step further by essentially asking Catholics to vote against President Barack Obama by writing that he hopes "no Catholic voting adult will soon forget this egregious and insensitive intrusion by our government.''
I do not fault Catholic leaders for standing by their beliefs, but it's disingenuous for the church to demonize the president and not its own parishioners.
For there is little doubt the majority of Catholics in this country are in favor of contraception, and regularly employ artificial birth control.
You can go as far back as 1967 when a special papal advisory commission of leading bishops, theologians and medical experts recommended the church relax its stance against birth control. Pope Paul VI disagreed.
Since then, national polls consistently show Catholics do not support, and typically ignore, the church's teachings on contraception.
A 1987 New York Times poll reported nine out of 10 U.S. Catholics believed someone could use contraceptives and still be a good Catholic. A 2005 Harris Interactive poll said 90 percent of U.S. Catholics support the use of birth control.
Catholic leaders have to be aware of this, and yet allow priests and others on the front line to turn a blind eye to this rampant disregard of the church's teachings.
And I'm not saying that unofficial policy is wrong. Between HIV and unwanted pregnancies, suggesting otherwise would be reckless. It just seems self-serving to now take a hard-line stance against the government.
Which brings us back to the top: Whom do you trust? Your church? Your country? Your conscience?


To: the Tampa Bay Times - in response to the above article...

RE: Primacy of Conscience

As an ethicist, let me compliment you (Mr. Romano) on your column of Feb. 2 for pointing out the essence of what we call the ethical dilemma. Framed the way you have makes it a little more clear for Americans there are many values pulling us different directions that require we prioritize.

Unfortunately the Bishops involved did not read my chapter on "Ethics" in the text "Spiritual Dimensions of Nursing Practice" or they would have found a diagram outlining values constellations and their various overlapping configurations which illustrate these different kinds of priorities and the fact that occasionally one value is so predominant that it truly guides and rules almost all of our choices. But this is a matter of choice.

Roman Catholic teaching holds that, "Man has the right to act according to his conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters." (Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraph 1782)

Some religious institutions have been more forward looking and have historically taken positions which underscore the applied truth of a ‘primacy of conscience’ stance even outside of the Catholic Church. For instance, in 1928 the Episcopal Church declared that matters of birth control were to be decided "by a woman, with the guidance of both a medical and a spiritual advisor of her choosing." This was later affirmed by the Lambeth Conference of 1930. The key here is, of course, that the heart of any moral or ethical decision lies in the heart of the individual and cannot be mandated, forced, or legislated.

The bottom line is that the Catholic Bishops have it backwards: the proposed Federal Policy on Health Care actually makes it possible for all religious people to be better Christians or Muslims or Hindi or Jews because it allows choice but does not require any person to act against his or her own conscience. The fewer restrictions mandated by others make it possible to be more faithful to any set of parochial values to which we wish to subscribe, whether part of a faith tradition or not. Law was never intended to be an opportunity to impose moral or religious standards on those of us who live in a free society. The fact that such a large percent of practicing Roman Catholics still use artificial birth control simply demonstrates the value and importance of ‘Primacy of Conscience’.