The traditional Christian focus concerning dying is on repentance, not dignity. The goal of a traditional Christian death is not a pleasing, final chapter to life, but union with God: holiness. The pursuit of holiness requires putting on Christ and accepting His cross. In contrast, post-traditional Christian and secular concerns with self-determination, control, dignity, and self-esteem make physician-assisted suicide and voluntary active euthanasia plausible moral choices. Such is not the case within the context of the traditional Christian experience of God, (...) which throughout its 2000 years has sternly condemned suicide and assisted suicide. The wrongness of such actions cannot adequately be appreciated outside the experience of that Christian life. Traditional Christian appreciations of death involve an epistemology and metaphysics of values in discordance with those of secular morality. This difference in the appreciation of the meaning of dying and death, as well as in the appreciation of the moral significance of suicide, discloses a new battle in the culture wars separating traditional Christian morality from that of the surrounding society. (shrink)

Aquinas’s conception of the relationship of faith and reason calls into question the arguments and some of the conclusions advanced in contributions to the debate on physician-assisted suicide by David Thomasma and H. Tristram Engelhardt. An understanding of the nature of theology as based on revelation calls into question Thomasma’s theological argument in favor of physician-assisted suicide based on the example of Christ and the martyrs. On the other hand, unaided reason calls into question his assumptions about the nature of (...) death as in some cases a good for the human person. Finally, if Aquinas is right about the relationship of faith and reason, Engelhardt’s sharp contrast between “Christian” and “secular” approaches to physician-assisted suicide needs reconsideration, although his conclusions about physician assisted suicide would find support. (shrink)

Definition of the problem: In parallel with public and philosophical discussions, there is an ongoing debate about euthanasia in theological ethics. In this situation it is helpful to provide a systematic overview of the different arguments and judgements. Arguments: A short introduction is followed by a first part dealing with the definition of terms. The second and major part concerning normative arguments is subdivided into three steps: the level of principles, the more concrete level of actions and finally the level (...) of social consequences. The third part presents some reflections following the eudaimonistic ethical tradition (the ethics of a good life and death) focusing on the central question: how to find meaning in life when faced with suffering. Conclusion: It would be fruitful to intensify the ethical reflection both on the problems concerning the foundations of social life, especially the meaning of dignity, autonomy and inviolability of human life, and social consequences of a liberal practice of euthanasia. In this context ethicists are challenged to reflect on the different approaches to what is or can be a good life and a human death. (shrink)