Reading: “Gospel of Life” by Pope John Paul II
The Gospel of Life:
The Encyclical Letter on Abortion, Euthanasia, and
the Death Penalty in Today’s World
by (now-Saint) Pope John Paul II
My rating: 4 out of 5 stars
I’m not a typical Catholic (if there is such a thing). I didn’t grow up in the faith, but eased in after marrying into it in my 20s then converting in my late 30s. Because I don’t have a lifetime of experience or a Catholic education to rely on, I fall back on what I do have – reading – when I want to better understand something about the faith. And it is in that spirit that I picked up a copy of The Gospel of Life (Evangelium Vitae) from 1995. Since the Dobbs decision – even before it – these issues, especially abortion, have been prevalent in the public sphere, while remaining a familiar refrain in homilies. It seemed a worthy endeavor to find out what this encyclical contains.
The Gospel of Life is organized into four chapters. The first discusses “Present Day Threats to Human Life,” the second “The Christian Message Concerning Life,” and the third “God’s Holy Law.” It ends with a call “For a New Culture of Human Life.” Though one might assume that the “threat” named here is primarily abortion – it is there in the text – but the opening chapter also contains criticisms of guns, war, environmental destruction— aspects of what the late pope calls a “veritable culture of death” that has a “self-centered concept of freedom,” which hampers “equal personal dignity” for all. Regarding abortion and euthanasia, criticisms allude to the notion that having a child takes away one’s ability to lead the best life, as well as the notion that disabled or terminally ill people are burdens from which no good can come. By contrast, the pope urges his readers to regard parenting or care-giving as opportunities to serve, to love, and to respect the humanity of others.
Thus, in chapter two, he writes, “Faced with the contradictions of life, faith is challenged to respond.” Combining reason with scripture, the text carries the reader forward into a defense of the idea that “Life is always a good.” This chapter is difficult to summarize, because it has many working parts. Points 29 through 51 lay down his philosophical basis, which is that life is a gift from God, the Bible says so, and reason confirms it. Thus, life should be preserved or protected in (almost) all situations.
In the third chapter, the text deals more concretely with the issues named in the subtitle. Pope John Paul II gives his answer to the difficult question of the death penalty by conceding that it is sometimes necessary to end the life of a person who poses a grave threat to society. This is the only point in the encyclical when the pope claims that a life could be ended intentionally for moral reasons. (Personally, I disagree.) Yet, he also acknowledges that with today’s modern prisons, that solution is rarely necessary. (With this, I do agree.) As one would assume, the bulk of his energy is spent on defending unborn children. Third, he argues against suicide and the practice of euthanasia, countering that suffering can have redemptive qualities for both the cared-for person and the caregiver. The chapter ends with an argument against the notion that political and governmental endorsement of any of these practices cannot be based majority-rule; falling back on that, he writes, would essentially mean that the people, not God, decide who lives and who dies.
After a presentation of his ideas on what the problems are, the final chapter devotes itself to solutions. Readers familiar with modern Catholicism will find what they expect: have faith, engage in service, build strong families, be active in protecting life. We read about the duty of both individuals and society, as well as the need for “a contemplative outlook” to “see life in its deeper meaning, who grasp its utter gratuitousness, its beauty and its invitation to freedom and responsibility.” Nearing the end, in point 85, he writes:
In celebrating the Gospel of Life, we also need to appreciate and make good use of the wealth of of gestures and symbols present in the traditions and customs of different cultures and peoples. There are special times and ways in which the peoples of different nations and cultures express joy for a newborn life, respect for and protection of individual human lives, care for the suffering or the needy, closeness to the elderly and the dying, participation in the sorrow of those who mourn, and hope and sire for immortality.
How will this happen? Through providing good education to all people, through responsible decision-making by civil leaders, through achieving work-life balance, through enabling societal structures and expectations that respect people in ways that go beyond their utility.
One good thing about reading English translations of papal encyclicals is that they are generally pretty accessible in terms of word choice and style. It’s not like trying to dive into theology or hermeneutics, where the discourse is dense and heavy. These are meant, it seems, to be read and understood by people with a reasonable education level. (I learned that when I read Laudato Si back in 2015.) The main difficulty about reading them is that, lacking narrative and having few concrete details, they get kind of boring and repetitive by the end.
What I was particularly glad to read in Pope John Paul II’s encyclical was his condemnation of cultural creeds that are built on the business community’s ethos of efficiency and productivity. He has real criticism for a personal value system that says that the best life is one that packs in everything it can, earns and spends as much as possible, where not one moment is left open for rest or contemplation. I agree with him that too many people regard their own lives, even their friends, children, and parents, in the way that a business owner would regard a business— every aspect must be useful and efficient, and it all must center on peak earning potential for me. It’s no way to live, collecting people and experiences like a savings account. And when that business-like creed is the basis of a life philosophy, it certainly is easy to decry or discard anything that seems inconvenient or that seems not to have practical use.
Where the late pope and I disagree are the real-world applications. As the head of the global Church, one of John Paul II’s goals was for governmental leaders to embrace Catholic positions and codify laws and statutes that reflect those values, while I, as an ordinary American Catholic, understand that the freedom to practice my faith is dependent on my country’s religious pluralism and toleration. As far as I’m concerned, religion and politics do overlap but should not merge. When one group starts turning its religious creeds into laws, which require criminal penalties to enforce, everyone is in deep trouble. I agree that all people should value life, but we really, really don’t want to open the political can-of-worms that would be necessary to define these matters in worldly legal terms. Love of humanity and respect for human dignity can and should be embraced, but they can’t be legislated, because they are matters of faith and conscience and should be lived as such.
Read More:Henry Nouwen’s The Prodigal Son Pope Francis’s Laudato Si Dorothy Day’s The Long Loneliness, Part One, Parts Two and Three
