By Rev. Richard Benson, C.M.

Does an embryo have a soul? Isn't society justified in putting to death a criminal that has committed a capital crime? Why should taxpayers have to support health care and schooling for undocumented children? Why didn't Pope John Paul II agree to call President Bush's invasion of Iraq a "just war"? When did health care become a "right"?

All of these apparently unconnected questions actually involve the same central Catholic moral principle, the consistent ethic of life. This principle is often associated with Cardinal Joseph Bernardin’s 1983 proposal of the “seamless garment” analogy, a reference from John 19:23 to the seamless robe of Jesus, to provide a moral compass to help Catholics apply moral principles to life issues present in the public square.

Cardinal Bernardin suggested that a consistent ethic of life might be the most effective approach in addressing issues dealing with human life and dignity in a modern society more and more identified with the “culture of death.” His seamless garment approach suggests that all life issues such as abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, social injustice, racism, prejudice, poverty, unjust war and economic injustice are most effectively confronted when done so with a consistent application of moral principles that are firmly founded on the intrinsic value of human life.

At the same time, Cardinal Bernardin himself made it clear that although the ethic he proposed never implied that all threats to life were to be considered equal, all threats could and should be addressed and taken seriously by the Catholic community.

That having been said, Bernardin’s vision did take hold. In the time since its proposal it is clear that the consistent ethic of life has grown to the point that it has been comfortably adopted into Catholic thought and is found throughout documents, encyclicals and statements issued from Rome and from the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.

The “consistent ethic of life,” as it is now commonly articulated, states basically that all human life is sacred from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death. In his encyclical, Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II taught the principle clearly:

• “"Human life is sacred and inviolable at every moment of existence” (n. 61).
• “As far as the right to life is concerned, every innocent human being is absolutely equal to all others” (n. 57).

In another encyclical, Veritatis Splendor, Pope John Paul elaborates on the scope of the consistent ethic:
“Before the norm which prohibits the direct taking of the life of an innocent human being ... there are no privileges or exceptions for anyone. It makes no difference whether one is the master of the world or the 'poorest of the poor' on the face of the earth. Before the demands of morality, we are all absolutely equal” (n. 57).

Thus the consistent ethic of life challenges every disciple of Christ to recognize and protect the innate dignity of human life, whether their own or their neighbors, from any unjust assault. While each of us and even society has stewardship over human life, Christians recognize that only God is the maker and taker of human life.

‘The Culture of Life’

Abortion, stem cell research and even in vitro fertilization involve a direct and deliberate attack on the unborn. Euthanasia and physician assisted suicide similarly attack our vulnerable sick and aged. Racism, prejudice, unfettered liberal capitalism, social injustice, poverty and human trafficking also are legitimately targeted and condemned by the consistent ethic of life.

John Carr, director, Social Development & World Peace for the USCCB, captured the concept quite well, in 2005:

“The ‘Culture of Life’ is much more than signing the partial birth abortion ban; it is about health care for pregnant mothers, it is about hunger at home and abroad, about war and peace. These involve prudential judgments, but they are not marginal or optional matters for Catholics....
“The consistent ethic of life is not a tactic, an excuse or scorecard. It is an expression of what Catholics believe and who we are. It has been clearly taught by John Paul II and the U.S. bishops. It does not make all issues equal, but applies Catholic teaching on human life and dignity to the major threats to the human person.

“The seamless garment metaphor has been replaced by an emphasis on a consistent and persistent defense of human life and dignity. The defense of life involves differing moral claims and ethical principles, but it calls us to preach the Gospel of Life and promote a culture of life from conception to natural death.

“The ‘Culture of Life’ is not a political slogan. It is a way of thinking and acting. It starts with the fundamental obligation to defend innocent unborn life but it does not end there. It extends to war and peace, hunger and health care, death and dying….”

When the consistent ethic of life was first articulated, some dissenting voices claimed that the principle would weaken the clear moral condemnation of abortion. In other words, they were concerned that addressing euthanasia, the death penalty, social injustice, racism, human trafficking and other clear assaults against human life and dignity would "dilute" the energy needed to address the evil of abortion.
Interestingly enough it was the very champion of the “culture of life,” Pope John Paul II, who anticipated this concern, did not see it as legitimate and consequently addressed it directly. For John Paul, the very essence and power of the “consistent ethic of life” and its application across the board is exactly what is needed to strengthen the Church's clear stance against abortion. Only by being consistently pro-life across the board can the church authentically witness to and proclaim the truth that God, not society, is the “Lord of Life.”

Abortions and executions

Pope John Paul shocked a number of Catholics when he challenged the moral legitimacy of capital punishment in his groundbreaking encyclical Evangelium Vitae, “The Gospel of Life.” What's more he did so in the context of the consistent ethic of life and intentionally connected the consistent ethic of life to his argument against the use of capital punishment:

“…that it [should] be applied in a very limited way or even that it be abolished altogether. …the nature and extent of punishment ought not to go to the extreme of executing the offender except in cases of absolute necessity, in other words when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Today, however, such cases are very rare, if not practically non-existent” (n. 56).

Anticipating that this new teaching on capital punishment might seem inconsistent or beyond the traditional understanding of the Fifth Commandment, “You shall not kill,” Pope John Paul II tied his condemnation of capital punishment to the condemnation of abortion:

“If such great care must be taken to respect every life, even that of criminals and unjust aggressors, the commandment ‘You shall not kill’ has absolute value when it refers to the innocent person. All the more so in the case of weak and defenseless human beings…” (n. 56).

In other words, Pope John Paul II is saying that when we defend life at any stage, even the life of a guilty criminal, because that life came from God and belongs to God, we make it clear that our protection of the innocent life of the unborn is absolutely consistent. Our stand against abortion is not weakened; rather, it is strengthened by the consistent ethic of life because it is morally exception-less.
This same theology—defending the consistent ethic of life—is found in Euthanasia, a 1980 declaration from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), then headed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI):

“Nothing and no one can in any way permit the killing of an innocent human being, whether a fetus or an embryo, an infant or an adult, an old person, or one suffering from an incurable disease, or a person who is dying.”

Consistent moral principles

Basically, the principle of a consistent ethic of life is the most powerful and effective challenge to a culture of life since it applies the same moral principles; (1) that all life comes from and returns to God, (2) that while humans are stewards of life, only God is the owner of life, and (3) that every truly good choice is "pro-life" in every sense of life, from the moment of conception to the moment of natural death.
Perhaps the clearest 20th century theological foundation for the consistent ethic of life as we now know it is found in Gaudium et Spes, “The Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World” (1965) from the Second Vatican Council. Herein we read a powerful challenge to embrace a truly wide and consistent understanding of the call to embrace a “culture of life”:

“…the council lays stress on reverence for every person; everyone must consider their every neighbor without exception as another self…so as not to imitate the rich man who had no concern for the poor man Lazarus. In our times a special obligation binds us to make ourselves the neighbor of absolutely every person, and of actively helping him or her when he/she comes across our path, whether they be an old person abandoned by all, a foreign laborer unjustly looked down upon, a refugee, a child born of an unlawful union and wrongly suffering for a sin they did not commit, or a hungry person who disturbs our conscience by calling the voice of the Lord: ‘As long as you did it for one of these, the least of my sisters or brothers, you did it for me.’