The issue of assisted suicide is currently generating significant debate within the Pontifical Academy for Life. Cardinal Willem Eijk, a physician and also a member of the academy, has firmly rejected certain suggestions, stating that both assisted suicide and euthanasia carry "the same moral responsibility" in the execution of a murder.
Two members of the Vatican's Pontifical Academy for Life have been criticized for publicly calling for support of assisted suicide in order to prevent the legalization of voluntary euthanasia in Italy.
Jesuit Father Carlo Casalone, a professor of moral theology at the Pontifical Gregorian University, proposed such an approach—which critics note is in total contradiction to the Church's teaching—in an article published on January 15 in the Jesuit periodical La Civiltà Cattolica, a journal whose articles are approved by the Secretariat of State.
His viewpoint was supported by another academy member, Marie-Jo Thiel, a professor of ethics at the University of Strasbourg, who wrote in the French newspaper Le Monde on January 31 that Father Casalone's suggestion was a sign of a broader shift in the Church's position.
Father Casalone, a physician who also heads the Cardinal Carlo Martini Foundation, wrote his article before the Italian Constitutional Court decided to organize a referendum on euthanasia in the country.
The Court had already legalized assisted suicide under very specific and well-defined conditions in 2019, but this led to a push by pro-euthanasia activists to request a national referendum on voluntary euthanasia.
Their campaign reached the Constitutional Court this month, supported by a petition with 1.2 million signatures from euthanasia advocates, far exceeding the 500,000 needed to organize a popular vote to amend existing laws.
But the Court rejected it on February 15, declaring a referendum "inadmissible" and arguing that amending the country's penal code to allow voluntary euthanasia would not guarantee "the minimum constitutionally necessary protection of human life, in general, and in particular of weak and vulnerable persons."
Also read | The Signs by Which God Accredited the Mission of Saint Joan of Arc
Medically assisted suicide involves a person with a terminal illness or incurable condition ending their life at their own request by administering a lethal dose of medication; voluntary euthanasia legally allows a doctor to kill a patient suffering from an incurable and painful illness or plunged into an irreversible coma, with the patient's consent.
Father Casalone argued in his article that giving an "overall negative assessment" of legislation seeking voluntary euthanasia risked "favoring the referendum" and its goal of legalization.
He therefore suggested invoking the principle of "imperfect laws," according to which, in some cases, it has been licit for a Catholic politician to vote in favor of a law that restricts an already passed law contrary to the Church's teaching—for example, voting to reduce the legal abortion period from 24 to 16 weeks.
In this case, he felt this principle could apply to promoting assisted suicide, allegedly a lesser evil, in order to prevent the greater evil of voluntary euthanasia—a suggestion that also seemed to have some sympathy from the Chancellor of the Pontifical Academy for Life, Bishop Renzo Pegoraro.
"We are in a specific context, with a choice to be made between two options, neither of which—assisted suicide or euthanasia—represents the Catholic position," Bishop Pegoraro told the French Catholic newspaper La Croix, adding that he believed a law was inevitable.
Bishop Pegoraro, who is also a physician, said that of the two possibilities, "assisted suicide is the one that most limits abuses, as it would be accompanied by four strict conditions: the person requesting assistance must be conscious and capable of expressing it freely, be suffering from an irreversible illness, experiencing unbearable suffering, and dependent on life-sustaining treatment such as a ventilator."
But Cardinal Willem Eijk, also a qualified physician and member of the academy, firmly rejected Father Casalone's suggestion and reasoning.
The Cardinal Archbishop of Utrecht in the Netherlands argued that there is "no significant moral difference" between medically assisted suicide and voluntary euthanasia, "neither on the side of the patient nor that of the doctor," as both bear "the same moral responsibility" in the execution of a murder.
The cardinal told the Register that by authorizing assisted suicide, "one is merely paving the way to also authorize euthanasia" and that, consequently, the argument that by authorizing assisted suicide legislation one could prevent euthanasia legislation "makes no sense."
"One would simply and automatically open the way to the legalization of euthanasia, because the ethical difference between the two is not significant," he said.
Cardinal Eijk also rejected the "imperfect laws" argument in this case. He noted that the principle was raised by Pope Saint John Paul II in his encyclical Evangelium Vitae in the context of restricting abortion, but he added that "voting for a law by which medically assisted suicide is authorized in no way implies a restriction on the legalization of euthanasia."
"On the contrary," he said, "the legalization of medically assisted suicide automatically opens the way to the legalization of euthanasia as the next logical step, because there is no significant moral difference between medically assisted suicide and euthanasia."
Jacopo Coghe, vice-president of the Italian pro-life group Pro Vita & Famiglia Onlus, agreed that "it is not moral to favor laws on euthanasia or assisted suicide. Period."
He added that those who think otherwise "go against the repeated warnings of Pope Francis and the Congregation for the Laity, Family, and Life." Mr. Coghe also told the Register that the argument put forward by Father Casalone is an "illusory approach" that will not be able to "withstand social pressure or judicial intervention," as seen with other similar legislation.
The correct course of action, Mr. Coghe said, is "always to evangelize," to proclaim God's love to the world, "which gives meaning to life and always makes it worthy." He added that "the Church's urgency" is not about "whether or how to pass assisted suicide laws, but to help millions of uninformed, deceived, and lost faithful to cope with changing times and the crises they face."
The public statements by Father Casalone and Thiel in favor of assisted suicide legislation have "disturbed" other members of the academy, said Jean-Marie Le Méné, president of the Lejeune Foundation. This organization is named after Jérôme Lejeune, the founding president of the academy.
Le Méné, who is also a member of the Academy, criticized his two colleagues in a commentary for the French daily Le Figaro, stating that "it is one thing for individuals to express their personal opinion, it is another to use their positions to officially involve the Pontifical Academy for Life." Furthermore, he said the academy cannot support such positions contrary to the Church's magisterium.
He also echoed Cardinal Eijk's rejection of applying Article 73 of Evangelium Vitae in this case, as it would, in his view, amount to "deliberately enacting a bad law to avoid another future law, which would be worse."
"The law it is supposed to avoid will end up passing even faster," he warned. "Nothing and no one will prevent extending the initial transgression, which invites medicine to cause death."
In comments to the Register, Le Méné said there is "no reason to think this teaching could be changed" and that the prohibition on killing "long predates Christianity; it is a matter of natural morality." Voting for an immoral law, he said, "can never be the choice of a Christian," and if the academy were to "fall into the trap of the lesser evil [it] would cause it to lose its justification."
Le Méné also criticized Thiel for publicly stating in her article that she was a member of the academy. Members of the Academy are bound by its statutes, including Article 5 §5(b), which states that academicians must "commit to promoting and defending the principles concerning the value of life and the dignity of the human person, interpreted in a manner conforming to the magisterium of the Church."
Le Méné said that supporting legislation in favor of assisted suicide "is a deviation" from such a prescription.
Le Méné said such incidents could be avoided if there were greater collaboration among academicians and decisions made together on works that are "worthy of publication and those that are not."
The Register asked the Pontifical Academy for Life if it wished to comment on the apparent violation of the academy's statutes and if measures would be taken to prevent such statements in the future, but it did not respond.
In a statement on February 18, the academy "warmly welcomed" the Constitutional Court's February 15 decision, stating that a referendum "would have opened the way to euthanasia." It also clarified that it "reiterates the teaching of the Catholic Church, reaffirms the value and respect of every human life, opposes suicide, therefore also assisted suicide, as the Pope has repeatedly recalled."
Le Méné told the Register on February 18 that he respected the judges' decision, adding that he did not think the court "needed Father Casalone's article to understand that a referendum on the homicide of a consenting person was madness and that it had to be rejected."
But he added that in the absence of a referendum, Parliament will still try to legislate in this direction, and Father Casalone's article "provides a justification for it to be adopted."
This article was originally published by the National Catholic Register on NCR. It has been reprinted and translated with the author's permission.